China Law Blog

Is it another one of those China Fear/Threat Books?

Absolutely not.

I do not bother reading those books because I know that any decent economist/political scientist can come up both with 20 reasons why China will take over the world and/or 20 reasons why China will collapse.

I'll read it.

Let me ask the question "What is a rising superpower *supposed* to look like?" If China is "strange" what is the "norm"? Since there is one superpower in the world, we can look at the history of the United States, and looking at US history, China looks much less "strange."

The reason I tend to be optimistic about China is that if you take every single problem that China has, it sounds a lot like the United States in 1890. Environmental degradation. Poor food. Social class divisions. Sweatshops. Etc. Etc. Even the corrupt, authoritarian governments were typical of the United States in the 1890's (at the national level you had a two party system, but most state and local governments were one-party states in the hands of a corrupt political machines. Try being a Republican in Mississippi in 1890, and heaven help you if your skin had a high melanlin content.)

The other reason I'm optimistic is that China has IMHO already done the hard part which was to convert a completely dysfunctional centrally planned economy and turn it into a partially functional market driven one.

The US and China were very disimilar in key ways in 1890:

The federal gov't had little influence over state and local governments and could not just randomly arrest people. States have their own rights under the constitution, DC has never been THE seat of power in the US. Even during the Iraq war, state governors refused to activate their national guard units for Iraq and Afganistan when they found out that their troops were to provide security for executives. Let's see a provincial governor try that (is there even a legal context in China for such a scenario?)

There was still a strong freedom of press and freedom of speech. The press was controlled by powerful families who were not easily manipulated or bullied.

You could be a Republican in Mississippi at that time as long as you supported segregation.

The states each had/have their own armies to stand up to the central gov't.

And lastly, many US citizens owned guns. The labor riots all over the NE US and the Appalachian coal mine wars approached a state of a second civil war, the willpower and firepower of common citizens (including many, many immigrants) forced state and the federal government to back down and enforce the existing rights of workers, crack down on political machines and give more rights to common people.

The scale of pollution in the US in 1890 pales to China today. Many chemicals that pollute China today didn't exist 117 years ago.

The US did not have China's massive gender imbalance problem or the "one child, 4 elders" problem.

The Chinese gov't hunts down poeple with homemade guns with a rabid paranoia. Guns have been a fundamental right of US citizens since its creation.

And if you are looking for a linear correlation between the US and China, that means China only has 117 years to go to catch the US where it is today...provided nothing happens to the CCP.

First, thanks for a great blog. I really learn a lot here.

Second, couldn't agree more on this book! It is simply unrivalled among all "business books" now being published on the subject of China. I find myself annoying my friends and colleagues by constantly retelling some of the insights from that book. My special favourite is his analysis of the motorcycle industry in China: it demonstrates perfectly the strange duality of China's enormous strength, and its weakness. Kynge's comparison of Chongqing with Chicago is another favourite.

"Business book" BTW is a misnomer, as you then think of these "How-to-books" that are now flooding the market. This book, together with Tim Clissold's excellent "Mr. China", provide a much deeper perspective than that.

nanheyangrouchuan,

Your list might be correct, but it lacks all the current ADVANTAGES that China has now, where the USA didnt have back then. There are many.

Would you care to write a similar comparison?

J

Alot of the "advantages" I could point out have shown to create disadvantages like massive oversupply, lack of economic and social flexibility to deal with change and a social upheaval.

Pick an "advantage" Jonathan, I'll shoot it down.

Fifty to one hundred years is roughly the timescale I'm looking at for China to develop to the point of the United States. Any massive upheaval is just going to turn the clock back.

Also nanh has a point. Any "advantage" can be turned into a disadvantage so if you start out from the point of view that China is never going to be a superpower, and nothing is going to change your mind, it's not hard to pick and choose notions that will reinforce that. If you think that China is destined to be a superpower (a very dangerous view if you ask me) then there is no lack of evidence that will point you to that conclusion.

My point of view is whether China becomes a superpower or not depends on the decisions that people make combined with a large amount of luck and historical accident. Since I'm in the "China *should* be a superpower camp" I'm doing whatever I can to see that China *does* become a superpower, which means coming up with a list of problems and doing what I can to fix them.

The question is are the problems too overwhelming to even bother, and I don't think they are.

twofish:

Why "should" China be a superpower?

Why should I get out of bed in the morning?

For dozens of interesting historical reasons, the idea that China should be a rich and powerful country (aka a superpower) has ended up as part of my psychology. Ultimately asking why I believe this is like asking why someone believes in this religion or that religion, it's more or less because its part of the value system that my parents taught me, and that I'm teaching my kids.

I'm pretty sure you don't like this, but one fact that you have to deal with is that I'm not the only one in the world that thinks (or more accurately feels) this way.

I have to say that I'm usually pretty impressed with your insights, but I found this book to be average at best. More of the same "watch China take over the world" hype that everyone is spewing nowadays--just a few different examples (so glad we're finished with Haier, Lenovo and Danona). It is neither new nor especially insightful--but it sure is a fast (simple) read.

Examples that Peking Duck thought were "clear headed and insightful" I found to trite and simplistic. The idea that China is a "land of contradictions" is to me an excuse for the author not defining what is really going on here.

Sure, there are tons of examples of every type of business and government involvement that will boggle the mind. But what does it mean for people that in in the middle of all the 'contradictions?" Of what value is this exercise mind boggling?

A list of "what makes China weird" should not really be a great addition to anyone's bookshelf.

twofish:

I'd like to see a list of these historical reasons, not for my benefit but for people like Dan. I'm very certain Chris D-E and some of the other long term expats in China know what you are going to say, but someone like Dan needs to see these reasons. I already know you are hesitant to post them.

You do betray your's and the CCP's feelings, though. Correlating your belief that China SHOULD be a superpower akin to a religion because that is exactly what I expected to hear from you.

Predicting 50 or 100 years in the future is a game that you can't win or lose. Barring any major life science breakthroughs or the sci-fi like capability of transporting human wetware out of our bodies, most of us will be dead by then anyway.

If you filter out all other noise and just look at this set of numbers: for those who were born in 1958, when they reached 18 they had close to 0% chance of entering college; for those who were born in China in 1979, when they reached 18 they had 6% chance of entering college; and for those who were born in 1987, when they reached 18 they had 31% chance of entering college, which is already better than some of the low-end OECD nations.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out without any major changes, sometime in the next 2 to 3 decades, the total number of college graduates in the Chinese labor force, will be larger than the WHOLE American labor force.

Jim Rogers went out and predicted that in the next 2 to 3 decades, CNY will appreciate 3 to 5 times against USD. What does that mean to you? It doesn't have to mean anything. You can always go back to your same old program, and soon you will be dead just like everybody else. But if you want to make something out of your life, you'd better not to overlook it.

The historical reasons are basically that my family and I have had a lot set of tragic events. My mother left her parents when she was twelve and never saw them again. My father had the misfortune of being a soldier on the wrong side of a civil war. All of those things (and a lot of other things I don't really care to talk about in public) influenced me. Just to give you an idea of what those things are, I would probably be a very different person if my father didn't die when I was a teenager.

When bad things happen, people try to find some meaning in those things, and hope for the future. The story that works for me includes references to the both the grandeur and the suffering of the past and a message that what you do will be remembered long after one is cold and dead. That serves both as a message of hope, and a very deep and powerful warning.

Nationalism *is* irrational. It *is* emotional. But emotions aren't bad things, and sometimes what appears irrational at the surface has some usefulness that isn't apparent. One thing that I've learned is that feelings, even strong feelings, are never evil. It's what you do with them, that matters.

The reason I think that China *should* be a superpower, is because it gives meaning to all of the tragedy that has happened over the last two hundred years. The past cannot be changed, the tragedies cannot be undone, but it is comforting to believe that they happened *for something*. To think and to know that one's life is part of something much larger than oneself, is a powerfully uplifting feeling.

I believe China should be a superpower because it makes me feel good to believe this. Everything else is just more or less irrelevant detail.

Now the interesting thing for me is how to I reconcile my Chinese nationalism with the fact that I'm also very proudly a supporter of American nationalism. My greatest fear is that these two powerful ideas will collide, and I think one of the things that I like like to be remembered for is to reconcile these identities.

The fact that I have multiple identities one reason I'm interested in constitutional law. The definition of an American patriot is someone who defends, protects, and upholds the Constitution of the United States, and this is something that I gladly do.

More deeply, law is a way that people with different beliefs and different views of the world figure out ways of avoid killing each other.

As far as why I'm positive about multi-national corporations and globalization. It's because an MNC is a place that I've found acceptance for who I am. In some places of the world, and among some people, I'm a monster, a half-bred, mongrel traitorous, dual loyalist. But the MNC, just cares about how much money I can make them, and the fact that I have multiple national identities to them is a good thing.

I'm all for globalization because in a world of nation-states, I am a monster. In a globalized world, I'm the norm. When I was young, it was considered shameful and traitorous to have more than one national identity. There was always the hidden question of who I *really* was. When I die, my hope is that most people in the world will have three or four national identities that they are juggling.

I'm curious if this was the answer you were looking for.

Jxie:

You are in over your head on this site.
", sometime in the next 2 to 3 decades, the total number of college graduates in the Chinese labor force, will be larger than the WHOLE American labor force."

Beijing already can't find enough jobs for nearly half of its engineering grads...the quality is too low.

"Jim Rogers went out and predicted that in the next 2 to 3 decades, CNY will appreciate 3 to 5 times against USD. What does that mean to you?"

He says alot of things, like he was going to move his whole family to China and that still hasn't happened (they must've got a whiff of the air and of a local public toilet). China must peg its currency to the ever depreciating US dollar. Go ahead and unpeg, see what happens.

twofish:
"Just to give you an idea of what those things are, I would probably be a very different person if my father didn't die when I was a teenager."

What would your dad think of supporting the CCP?

"The reason I think that China *should* be a superpower, is because it gives meaning to all of the tragedy that has happened over the last two hundred years."

Please just go ahead and say "xxx years of humiliation" and be done with it. I think the range is from 150 to 400 years depending on who you talk to. No country "deserves" anything and it is by geographical accident and UN bungling that the US is the world superpower/global cop (everyone bashes the US about its activities but when there is a problem the first question is "why doesn't/when will the US do something?").

I am not positive about MNCs because they are becoming more and more like borderless nation states and will gladly sell out or enslave a nation and its people for the bottom line. MNCs have their religion and AQ has its religion.

"some places of the world, and among some people, I'm a monster, a half-bred, mongrel traitorous, dual loyalist"

I imagine those places would be Taiwan and China, possibly HK as well. But what do you expect given the circumstances and what is at stake? Are you willing to trade 40 million Taiwanese for the CCP's happiness?

As for "globalization" I am also a believer in it, but the human race, especially governments and corporations, are not psychologically or structurally ready for it. Globalization is a process of human social evolution, not a Wall St. buzzword.

"What would your dad think of supporting the CCP?"

I don't think he'd mind. One of the tragedies of my family history is that half the people ended up supporting the KMT and the other half ended up supporting the CCP. I suspect that he'd be glad that this argument is over and that everyone is now working for the national good.

"Please just go ahead and say "xxx years of humiliation" and be done with it. I think the range is from 150 to 400 years depending on who you talk to."

But the interesting thing is that I'm lucky enough to be born in the first time in 400 years in which China really has something to be proud of. The "era of humilation" is over, and my task is to make sure that China doesn't mess things up.

"No country "deserves" anything"

Correct. If you want to be a superpower, you have to earn it. That's why I said that it is dangerous and self-destructive to think that your country deserves to be a superpower.

About religion. MNC's have their religion. AQ has their religion. So do Marxists and "democracy activists." MNC's are less dangerous since they have to interact with reality sometimes.

"I imagine those places would be Taiwan and China, possibly HK as well. But what do you expect given the circumstances and what is at stake? Are you willing to trade 40 million Taiwanese for the CCP's happiness?"

Curiously no. In the case of Mainland China, my parent's family were persecuted for having overseas relatives, but everyone realizes what a stupid mistake that was. In the case of Taiwan, I've never had any trouble with "ordinary folk", it was a rather small number of intellectuals that thought I was weird, and part of my efforts has been to keep these people out of power. My wife comes from "deep green" country in Taiwan, and the issues there are different than you think. Most farmers near Tainan care much more about sugar prices than missiles or the PRC.

One problem that I have with your posts is that you end to expolate and make assumptions about the way the world works that are simply contradictory to what I see. I've been trying to figure out what you've directly seen and what you are assuming. Personally, I don't think you've seen anything in Mainland China that is wildly different than the stuff I've seen, but it's different things we've seen in the rest of the world that makes the difference.

Which leads me to ask. I suspect I answered the question differently that you thought that I would. What did you think I would say?

twofish.

I too work for big business. I'm doing it because i got fed up with academia and increasingly cynical about the human race. It is true that Multinationals are democratic in the sense that they go beyond boundaries of race and national boundaries, in the quest for profit and shareholder value. But you are seriously deluding yourself if you think that somehow by doing this you are working towards progress in the world. The US has been brutal and terrible to other countries in its history, all the signs are that China (spurred on by attitudes like your own) will be the same, if not worse.

Multinational corporations are able to function the way they do in the existing context of trade law. All the signs I can see is that this context will change rapidly at some point in the near future, as the protective tarriffs emerge and Europe wakes up to the sheer significance of chinas rise and increasing influence in the world. How this will affect Western financial institions i have no idea and wouldn't like to speculate on.

But, yeah. I think the only reaosn why one would work for big business is because of greed, indifference, bitterness, or because they are seriously deluding themselves about the way the world actually works. For me, its bitterness and indifference.

"But the interesting thing is that I'm lucky enough to be born in the first time in 400 years in which China really has something to be proud of. The "era of humilation" is over, and my task is to make sure that China doesn't mess things up."

China messes things up for itself again and again, the only country China really has to blame for its "humiliation" is itself and its cyclical culture of greed, pettiness and self-destruction.
Which is again repeating except this time throw in massive gender imbalance and unimaginable pollution.
And it IS the CCP's fault due to its fear of losing absolute power and facing any level of accountability to the people it rules.

"- |" pretty much covers the rest of your position regarding MNCs.

But as for how the US has treated other countries, I would say we've been much less bad than other world powers. Europe has been pretty good at slinking away from the lasting mess it created in the middle east and Africa while the US takes the blame. But that is typical for Europeans.

[q]But you are seriously deluding yourself if you think that somehow by doing this you are working towards progress in the world.[/q]

I do have choices, and no one forces me to work here. If I thought that I'd be contributing more to world progress by running a hot dog stand, I'd do that instead.

[q]The US has been brutal and terrible to other countries in its history, all the signs are that China (spurred on by attitudes like your own) will be the same, if not worse.[/q]

It's all about balance of power. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. What is important in an international system is to make sure that power is distributed evenly. I think China should be *a* superpower. I think it would be a disaster if China was the only superpower. It would be better if Russia, Japan, India, Brazil, South Africa, and the United States also were superpowers so that what happens on the planet is more of a balance of interests.

That's one thing about working in an MNC. It forces you to be non-zero sum. If I said I want China to be powerful at the expense of India and Russia, the Indians and Russians I work with wouldn't be happy. So I have to take the view, I want to make China rich and power, but I have to do it in a way that also benefits India and Russia.

You are right. Every nation has skeletons and bad things about them. Part of the reason that I've asked Nanh what I have is I'm wondering if there is a particular reason that China shouldn't have a seat at the table.

Do you have any better options? Part of the reason that I find academics annoying is that they have a very narrow view of "making the world better." Somehow if you aren't a political activist, and you are just an ordinary person trying to do they best they can, then what you do doesn't matter.

Someone who works hard at a hot dog stand so that he can save a few dollars to buy some extra toys for his kids. That makes the world better. Part of my job is helping him do his job.

[q]But, yeah. I think the only reaosn why one would work for big business is because of greed, indifference, bitterness, or because they are seriously deluding themselves about the way the world actually works. For me, its bitterness and indifference.[/q]

How sad. I suppose I should be thankful that through it all, I've managed to keep my ideals intact. The thing about multi-national corporations is that they are huge bureaucracies, where the right hand doesn't know what the left is doing. They might be having the "let's rape the planet" meeting on the floor on top of mine, I don't know.

But I have to go with what I see. Maybe the guys on the next floor are making the planet worse, but that gives me more of the reason to make the planet better in my bit of the woods.

I do care a lot about what I do because I have choices. I've hit the economic jackpot. I could leave my job, go out and shine shoes, and I'd still be living better than 95% of the people on this planet. That gives me the option to just walk out the door if I don't think that what I'm doing makes the world a better place. But since I'm useful to them, the powers that be have to listen to me a bit to keep me from doing that.

NH: For all your negativity about China, do you have any positive feelings about China at all? Or have you concluded that China, for all its continuing developments, will collapse/implode somehow, and return to some primitive state? It is not that I don't enjoy your posts; they are pointed and provocative. But what's your bottom line, if you don't mind me asking?

Twofish: My wife is also a mainlander born in TW, and all the family that didn't get out had a rough time of it during the GCR. When I first met them in 1980, they were toasting each other that they were still alive, having been stripped of money, position and housing, even the loyal Communists among them who, despite the incredible abuses, still believed in their hearts "gong chan zhu yi hui jiu Zhongguo", and they felt not small antipathy that part of their long-time suffering had been due to one husband and wife (i.e. my in-laws), among the otherwise huge family, who had fled to TW.
In light of all the realities which you clearly know, do you not feel any of the negativity that NH displays? Or are you "spiritually" committed to overlooking all the past abuses, in favor of moving forward?
And are you not concerned that it can/might happen again? Or are you working to prevent that possibility, and if so, how?

NH and Twofish: I'm not taking a position here. Just trying to get more position statements from you. Thanks.

Twofish:

A multipolar world is fine in principle, but how this would work in reality is impossible to guess. Based on what you say in a your various blog posts, i would criticise you because you think of relations between different nations and not about the power relations amongst the people within them. I would suggest to you that you are not helping China rise to becoming a 'superpower', instead you are helping an elite partake in environmental devastation and the economic disempowerment of the majority of chinese people: eg the peasants, who make up 65% of the population and appear to be living in absolute and increasing misery.

But yeah, im not trying to claim any kind of virtuous position here. It's just probably better to see things correctly.

Re the actual topic - kynges book - i ditto the prasie heaped on it so far. However, the one thing i thought was that it was quite predictable. The questions kynge raises are spot on, but he doesnt offer any pointers as to how they are going to be answered, which is what i was looking for in the book.

Twofish:

A multipolar world is fine in principle, but how this would work in reality is impossible to guess. Based on what you say in a your various blog posts, i would criticise you because you think of relations between different nations and not about the power relations amongst the people within them. I would suggest to you that you are not helping China rise to becoming a 'superpower', instead you are helping an elite partake in environmental devastation and the economic disempowerment of the majority of chinese people: eg the peasants, who make up 65% of the population and appear to be living in absolute and increasing misery.

But yeah, im not trying to claim any kind of virtuous position here. It's just probably better to see things correctly.

Re the actual topic - kynges book - i ditto the prasie heaped on it so far. However, the one thing i thought was that it was quite predictable. The questions kynge raises are spot on, but he doesnt offer any pointers as to how they are going to be answered, which is what i was looking for in the book.

twofish:

MNCs can be worse than nation states because MNCs do not have ideological power struggles. Even the US and UK contest for influence and we're about as close as two countries could politically get.

Look at the trend executive suits since the dot-com burst. You, Dan, Todd, Chris DE, etc all do our own parts to get onto boards or into executive suites in our own respective companies then elect each other into the boards of our companies or into CEO or President positions at our respective companies. 30 MNCs are in effect managed by 10 guys in such an arrangement (I'm using ratios so no nitpicking).

As for Todd, the PRC as it exists today is already a reckless user of its existing power. Who has given out nuclear weapons data and materials to Lybia (gave UK its chinese blueprints), Pakistan, NK and Iran (pics of known top chinese nuke scientists in Iranian labs)? China. Bio-weapons? Also China. Selling guns and jets is one thing, selling WMDs to cause trouble for others is another.

And China's childish behavior over Taiwan is another reason to scorn China's rise, with all of China's other developmental hurdles, they want to make an issue out of a little island, stockpiling conventional missiles and neutron warheads (PLA doctrine discusses at length using neutron weapons as a less destructive way to acquire territory) to pick a fight with 40 million people who are content doing what they do.

And while the CCP pummels or kills anyone who mentions Mao's little extermination job on 30-50 million Chinese people, they won't let anyone forget the Nanjing massacre or "150 to 400 years of humiliation". Such is not the behavior of a culture or government as aged as China.

Lastly, any country/society that regards itself as "the guardians of heaven" and all foreigners as barbarians...in the 21st century, is ill-suited to take its place on the world stage.

Let's not forget how China treats its own people:
organ harvesting of political opponents, local warlords around the country, hamstrung consumer and environmental protection, general thuggery and terrorism of the populace.

China has much more in common with an African dictatorship than a responsible world stakeholder of any sort.

[q]In light of all the realities which you clearly know, do you not feel any of the negativity that NH displays? [/q]

The question for me is not how good or bad the situation is, but what *I* can do to make the situation better or worse. Also yes there is a huge amount of negative stuff in China, but I think that NH has such an unbalanced picture that it's really hard for me to take his overall view seriously even if I agree that parts of it are accurate.

There are some wonderous and wonderful things in Chinese civilization that can't and shouldn't be ignored while you fix the bad stuff. There are also times when I've seen and talked with people from other countries with situations far worse than China's, that those conversations have let me both sad and relieved.

My frustration with NH, is that he complains a lot, but he doesn't offer any better ideas for what *I* should do when I get up in the morning other than give up. Even if he is right and I am doing something useless, I want the words "he tried" to be on my gravestone. My fear is that I'm making the situation worse, so if NH can convince me that what I'm doing is making the situation worse, I'll hand in my resignation tomorrow.

[q]Or are you "spiritually" committed to overlooking all the past abuses, in favor of moving forward?[/q]

I'm not overlooking anything. Part of the reason I believe what I do is that I got what was in effect a personal apology from some people that needed to apologize. (Part of the reason that it is hard to have this conversation is that a lot of what I believe involves some very personal stuff, that I don't feel comfortable talking in public.)

As far as how to prevent it from happening again. My conclusion is what happened to China happened because of lack of institutions and lack of political stability that allowed crazy and evil people to end up with absolute power. That's why I'm interested in law. That's also why I end to be against revolutions, because revolutions destroy the delicate restraints that keep crazy people out of power. This is also why I am doing what I can to create a middle class in China.

Finally one of the root causes of much of the mess that has plagued China is a group of people that were so certain that they knew what was going on, that they didn't have the self-doubt to restrain themselves. The thing that makes both people and regimes into psychopaths is the inability to feel empathy, and in the case of regimes it is caused by a cause so important and great that you lose sight of the costs and the possibility of mortal error.

Part of the reason I disagree with NH, is that he seems to think the problem is the existence of elites, when I fact the history of the world has been that if you destroy one elite, you create another one, which could be much worse than the one you got rid of.

I enjoy the debate too, so keep up the good work. I would say that the main difference between Nanhe and Twofish is not how they talk about China, but how they talk about themselves. In his last post, Twofish referred to himself more than thirty-two times, whereas he mentioned China five times or so. Nanhe almost never talks about himself. Just a point.

Twofish, I admire your sentiments, but seems like you'll be awfully busy trying to build the middle class in China and perform other feats of social engineering. How do you go about doing that?

To talk about what I do for the world or China is simple: I make clean water from dirty water and living in China was my inspiration to do that.

But those common people living in China are going to continue to drink dirty water because of the Chinese gov't. Beijing both will not and cannot effectively and evenly enforce laws that will clean up the country, businesses will do nothing that takes even one mao out of their pocket.
Both the EU EPA and US EPA have offices there to advise CEPA, which is actually in a very weak position, being an sub-department of commercial development offices.

In short, China doesn't want help and guidance, it wants money and technology. And all that China does with money is spend it on weapons or officials, all China does with technology is find military related apps or copy it for export to poorer countries. And the reason for all of China's bad behaviors:

"Other countries also have problems".

Nanhe, ever since your exclusive information on that VT killer being a Chinese student who was jealous of his girlfriend leaving him for a white man, I stopped even paying cursory attention to your prolific posts. But since you have to put my name first in your post...

Beijing already can't find enough jobs for nearly half of its engineering grads

English isn't your first language and it shows in your writing and reading comprehension. But it's fine -- it isn't mine either. You just need to convey your ideas more precisely. Were you trying to say that close to half of the Chinese engineering graduates were not able to find gainful employment after their graduation, or were you really emphasizing that "Beijing" (the Chinese government? the Beijing government?) wasn't responsible of half of their employment? Now if it's the former, can you substantiate that? Something along this line should be fine: according to xxx's report on xx/xx/xxxx, 4x% of the Chinese engineering graduates in 200x remained jobless x months after their graduation.

China must peg its currency to the ever depreciating US dollar. Go ahead and unpeg, see what happens.

If this alternative reality of yours isn't substance-induced, I urge you to seek some psychiatric help, really. CNY has not been pegged to USD, for quite a while already.

Why do "I" want China to become a superpower?

1) To annoy Nanheyangrouchuan

2) To annoy Nanheyangrouchuan

3) To annoy Nanheyangrouchuan

Do I need to go further? Honestly I question people's interest in understanding his personal brand of psychosis. He is, in a few words, a less interesting version of Conrad (For those who remember the old Gweilo Diaries). Nanheyangrouchuan's position should not be treated on the level of an individual, but rather as an ideological synthesis of two contradictory strands of thinking regarding China in the American intellectual lazystream. First is the China threat scenario with the PRC fulfilling the same role as the erstwhile Soviet Union. A veritable Lilith who births demons for the U.S. to confront and destroy. The second China scenario is the China doom-gloom-collapse. This draws somewhat from the Cold-War ideology of the first stream, but principally relies on an older form of thinking; the Orientalist paradigm of despotism, savagery, and stagnation.

This somewhat quixotic combination of China as doomed while simultaneously being the second coming of Satan is not altogether unique. Gordon Chang practically pioneered the field or at least made it more public.

Regarding NH, simply search his name via google and you can see his fingerprints practically over every China blog. It takes a "special" kind of person to fly into a polemic rage regarding China in the comments section of a blog post about Parent-Student day at a Children's school in Shanghai.

"but seems like you'll be awfully busy trying to build the middle class in China and perform other feats of social engineering"

Typical of twofish to believe in absolute control, just like the CCP. Societies can't be engineered, they have to grow and evolve. That is the key to the success of western civ.

I don't believe in top down social engineering. Rather what I try to do is to look around me, try to figure out how to make the world a better place, and what I can get done, I do, what I can't get done, I try not to worry about. What really worries me is the very real possibility that I'm making things worse.

I do talk a lot about my personal experiences for a number of reasons. People need to be skeptical about what the read, and I try to provide enough information about what I see and why I believe what I believe, so that people can figure out how this relates to what they see and believe. My experience is that in order to figure out what is going on, you need multiple perspectives. I've also found it to be important to be able to distinguish between what you observe from what you are guessing based on previous experience.

National histories make too much of kings and generals, when the people that really make history are ordinary people doing what seem to be superficially ordinary things. The shopkeeper that sells dim sum on Canal Street is part of the great and grand effort to create a Chinese middle class. What I do is to work for them.

Until that shopkeeper becomes competition for your MNC, then he/she gets squashed. Usually through regulatory means instead of through even competition.

That shopkeeper also has to keep greasing local officials, including the fire dept. and police, to stay open.