Hacker News Reader

Comment by pseudolus | Hacker News Reader

More interesting than the actual article are the comments that follow it, which appear to follow the same line that appears on Hacker News with respect to China based articles. They're incredibly polarized which speaks to an ongoing unease in the West with respect to China's growth. A certain large percentage being extremely vocal of their criticism of China, some being laudatory and very few striking a middle ground. Had the article been about Mumbai, Lagos or Karachi I'm doubtful such reactions would have been elicited.

View on HN

I spent first half of my life in Asia, and second half in the West so I am very much under influenced by cultures on both sides. I've always tried my best to view these issues as objectively as possible and without any biases.

China of the past has always accepted that they were inferior, but they were always willing to learn which was why most people accused them of copying from others. However, human knowledge and innovations have always been about replicating what others have already done, and then adding your own tweaks to it. Nobody could go from 50 to 100 without climbing up through every step, and China was willing to climb those steps at all costs. They have studied Western society extremely well over the years. China were able to extract all the best elements from the West, removed the not-so-good ingredients, and then applied those filtered results back to the country.

On the opposite side, it's understandable why most people are criticizing China because psychologically it's very difficult to accept an inferior opponent who was only considered as "copier" not long ago could now in fact be as good, or possibly even better in the future. It's not easy considering they have been leading by a wide margin for such a long time.

The danger here is while China has quietly concentrated all their effort to adapt the best formulas from the West, people on the other side continue to ignore an inevitable reality. Instead of investigating China to see why they have done so well and to obtain some of their knowledge in return, many are still refusing these facts and trying their best to hold onto old ideas that just badly need updates. If not careful, we have seen this scenario played out time and time again in business (Kodak, Myspace, Blackberry, etc...).

Despite what others may want us to believe, majority of today world are still operating based on zero-sum game. Italy has seen its real GDP in decline and is the first G7 country to endorse China's "Belt and Road" initiative. In their own view, China of today no longer believes they're an inferior opponent.

It's about time people should forget about the past and start looking more into the future. Our world is changing very fast and failing to do that may quickly leave people behind before they even realize it.

The end of my MBA program was a trip to China, with a week spent in Shanghai. a portion of our trip was meeting with the then CEO of China IBM and he toured us through the most ambitious project I'd ever heard: the Chinese Government hired IBM to create a nationwide western medical infrastructure - they needed everything from the health science courses in high school, university majors, nursing and medical universities, and hospitals and pharmacies by the thousand. This was a giant jaw dropping ambitious effort, and from what we could see the entire effort was being executed with the latest organizational and educational models known at the time from the west. I thought it was like taking the entirety of the Harvard Review and attempting a mass implementation of all that thinking in a real world project. After the trip was over, I remember thinking that such forward thinking investment was going to make China unbeatable within my lifetime. Looks like that is becoming true already, 14 years later.

The US is strangled by responsibility-avoidance everywhere, public and private sector. Layers and layers of consultants and bureaucrats to make sure no-one ever makes a decision without being able to point a finger elsewhere, repeat recursively for each added layer. No one with the will and authority to call people on this behavior and cut through the BS—the people at the very top are doing it, too, in fact it's most of what they do—so it works, and so it keeps happening, on a larger and larger scale.

I agree with you, @asark But I would change "..strangled by responsibility avoidance..' Into US business business are forced into culture of 'plausible deniability'.

If you do not follow that culture, your business, if successful, will be virtually and very quickly devoured by lawyers or partisan politicians seeking their racketeering tax.

Both of those professions essentially became licensed racketeers in the Western world.

I would also build up on your premise, and say that it is not that China is advancing at incredible pace, it is that our own West Europe and US have been slowed down by the above internal nemeses.

This is the dangerous allure of an authoritarian state and China has been here before -- many times. Replace "western medical infrastructure" with "a massive wall to keep the barbarians to the north out" or "a massive canal to connect the two rivers" and you'll get the same effect. Authoritarian states, which China really basically pioneered during the Qin dynasty, can accomplish great things when its powers are wielded correctly. The problem is that when the people or person in charge is incompetent, crazy, and/or lazy then the whole thing just goes to hell. The often tried and just as often unsuccessful solution is to have good court officials and properly educating the heir-apparent but the cycle of dynasties and the catastrophe that follow their overthrows suggests that it is not a good long term solution. In fact, these violent overthrows often erases many of the accomplishments of the peaceful periods. This is sort of the problem democracy solves: accountability allows the leader(s) to be changed in a non-violent way. The problem with democracies is that it is almost by definition very average in progress. It is slow and steady but the overall trend is positive. It takes a very long term view to appreciate the steadiness of progress in democracies. The US is on track to overtake the majority of Chinese dynasties in term of longevity.

Just want to address one point: China (and the Qin dynasty) was definitely not a pioneer of authoritarian control!

Authoritarianism is good when its good, and really bad when its bad.

Democracy is good when its good, and okay when its bad.

Democratic system are never the fastest way of getting something done, but seems to be the most consistently less-bad system for outcomes. The state that can build an entire medical infrastructure from scratch is also the same one that can build vast concentration camp systems far out in the provinces.

This is an important point. I agree. China will fail - and fail badly - in my lifetime - again. Authoritarianism failed them badly during the Cultural Revolution and the Great Leap Forward.

"These policies led to social and economic disaster, but these failures were hidden by widespread exaggeration and deceitful reports. In short order, large resources were diverted to use on expensive new industrial operations, which, in turn, failed to produce much, and deprived the agricultural sector of urgently needed resources. An important result was a drastic decline in food output, which caused millions of deaths in the Great Chinese Famine."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward

Sure, they'll not make that mistake again - but they'll make others just as egregious. It's what authoritarians do best.

I’m not so sure. Plenty of authoritarian countries have done quite well (and even transitioned to more democratic systems peacefully) in Asia like South Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore.

Right. I think they will fail if they don't transition to a democratic system. What an amazing country it would become if that happens.

I think the cause and effect are flipped: if they succeed they will want democracy, if they fail to escape the middle income trap they will never reach high enough on the hierarchy of needs to demand political voice.

> It takes a very long term view to appreciate the steadiness of progress in democracies.

That's ironic given China's vaunted ability to think very long-term (100-year strategy).

This has always been my opinion, you can only go so far with a strong man driven - authoritarian regime, eventually it will implode. China was very poor not too long ago, people subsisting on next to nothing. People are not questioning anything, because they are only now entering the middle -class workforce. When these folks move to the next level in the rung, they will start questioning and demanding what we in the west consider fundamentals of democracy - free speech, diversity. You can install a cyber wall, block off all western press, but your people are traveling to the west, in fact, Chinese tourists are the biggest contingent to Europe. You cannot prevent the dissemination of ideas, and ideas are more powerful than a nuclear bomb!

China has been "about to implode" according to misguided Western observers since 1989 and shows no signs of doing so 30 years later.

They said the same about Rome

The great thing about being a bear is that you’ll be right eventually, but the million dollar question is when

Not to belittle your experience, but one of the key issues in an authoritarian state is that nobody is held to account.

So, if you’re a politician or a big businessman, you can say whatever you like. We have a 3 year plan to eradicate X. We will completely redevelop the entire southern sector of the city and everyone will be rich and happy. And we’ll do it in 2 years.

China does a lot and achieves a lot, but for example, each time you read something China related in the news, check how many times it says “China plans to....” or “Government announces plan to.....”

America copied a lot of ideas from England during the industrial revolution. From my cursory understanding of things it seems like copying technology is how you get up to speed, before you can start really innovating yourself.

I think a lot of the ideas about how China isn't capable of innovation for cultural reasons is frankly rooted in racism. Not long ago they were a developing country, and they are rapidly, rapidly getting up to speed. If you were raised by subsistence farmers, you can rise above that but it's hard to become a technological prodigy.

But there's a whole generation of Chinese people being raised in a modern, prosperous economy, and I don't see any reason why they shouldn't be capable of the same contributions that Western students will make.

I find your perspective very interesting, because I think most Westerners would really strongly disagree that China "took the best elements from the West".

I think we agree that China took whatever it could to make itself powerful. But if you ask a Western person, is it really the power of our countries that defines greatness?

If I think of any country and what makes it great, I always end up thinking about things that definitely do not exist in China. I think the greatest moments of civilization are found in compassion, humanism, freedom, the fight for liberty, the preservation of peace, philosophy, art, music, poetry, scientific pursuit even against church&state etc.

China doesn't care about these things, at all, or is overtly hostile to them if they compromise efficiency.

China is not the first country to be very efficient while having concentration camps. People are afraid not because they don't respect China, nor because they think China is inferior.

We are concerned because we think China has NOT taken the best from the Western world. In fact, quite the opposite.

You're right. I should have clarified myself better. Those best elements were mostly applied to building wealth for China and strengthening their economy only. Other aspects related to political ideologies which will always be very different from the West, and I believe those topics should always be avoided on HN.

We have to understand that China has never been able to enjoy such economic power at this level throughout their history, so they have been waiting for this position for such a long time. Their current position may potentially reshape future history of human civilization. When you have the entire country concentrating all their effort on one and only one objective, the rest will have to take a backseat. For example, China didn't have to spend trillion of dollars going to war which was also another reason why they were able to laser focus on just one single goal.

This definitely doesn't mean it would make China the most balanced country overall as everything in life is always a trade off. One may gain in one area but would always lose in another. I'm not saying people should be afraid of China, I'm only saying they should not lock themselves up in the old world, and instead be ready and willing to learn from others because obviously China must have been doing many things right to get here.

I don't believe this is unique in China's history. Their economic power was certainly world class in previous times. They were a manufacturing powerhouse and held monopoly over many goods in a global trade network. Not only that, China had more power projection in the past. They had direct influence in current day Afghanistan and Central Asia until they lost at the battle of Talas River. As well as having tributary states in Japan and Korea. Currently, the US and allies surrounds China in such a way that they don't have the same influence.

So there is no literature, art, music, community, philosophy, traditions in China? China is far from perfect, but this holier-than-thou attitude is nauseating. It is awful to be a Tibetan or Huygur or even a college boy asking for reform, because China will crush you.

At the same time it was/is awful to be a Guatemalan/Nicaraguan/Iraqi/Cambodian under American treatment so they see you as sub-human and disposable. So except for economic purchasing power difference (which are more or less rapidly decreasing) I dont see any substantial difference between China and USA.

> So there is no literature, art, music, community, philosophy, traditions in China? China is far from perfect, but this holier-than-thou attitude is nauseating.

I stopped reading GP’s post at that point and began composing a similar reply, but quickly realized that the effort would be futile. People such as the GP are set in their views and seemingly content to broadcast pure ignorance.

You're kind of ignoring the giant elephant in the room - China is a authoritarian regime, and Emperor Xi recently declared himself Emperor for Life. Criticize Emperor Xi and be sent to the gulag. Not to mention the new dystopian Chinese Social Credit System. Did we forget about the millions of deaths resulting from the Cultural Revolution? Is China a country you would choose to live in for the rest of you life? How about your children?

I think you are the exact kind of people mentioned by gp

This is the exact opposite of what an 'elephant in the room' is.

Webster:

>Definition of elephant in the room : an obvious major problem or issue that people avoid discussing or acknowledging

Your comment is not saying anything new that hasn't been repeated ad nauseam already. Your comment is not enlightening anyone about the hitherto unknown great evils of China. Any topic remotely involving China will illicit dozens of responses such as yours with the exact same hysterical, copy-pasted examples. The fact is, people can't seem to stop discussing or acknowledging the problems or issues mentioned - which is fine I guess, but they are certainly not the elephants in the room you describe them to be.

"Elephant in the room" may not have been the best term—but what he was reacting to was that the GP specifically doesn't mention China's authoritarianism.

That is the issue I have with China, not some east vs west superiority complex.

Must every sentence containing the word China also include the word authoritarianism?

No. However, it should be included in any post discussing the reason many western nations are uncomfortable with China's position on the world stage.

I'm critical of China because they're an authoritarian regime with an awful human rights record, whose citizens wholly lack free expression and privacy. If China was to improve their record on human rights, I would have no problem with them or their position on the world stage.

I disagree with why Western commentators struggle to accept China’s ‘success’ - it’s not sour grapes or jealousy as you suggest.

China is breaking all of the established rules that have guided western societies for decades/centuries: Governments work for the people. Authoritarianism doesn’t work. Faking and copying will fail. Hubris leads to a fall.

China’s political model and economic models have worked exceptionally well on a number of levels for 3-4 decades now, but to a lot of people, it still just looks like an authoritarian government forcing present and future generations to make vast sacrifices (health, quality of life, freedoms, rights) for the benefit of the CCP.

Time will tell.

That just sounds like another way of saying we should be learning from this. Even if the trade offs aren’t worth it for us we shouldn’t be surprised when stuff that “shouldn’t work” does in fact work.

Maybe - the neoliberal dogma of the last 40 years has been that you can’t have economic prosperity without democratic reform and liberal politics. China has shown categorically that this isn’t true.

However, China might still prove the West correct in the long term. The breakneck economic development and oppressive political system has stored up a lot of huge problems, any of which could see the country slump into serious decline or worse.

> China might still prove the West correct in the long term. The breakneck economic development and oppressive political system has stored up a lot of huge problems, any of which could see the country slump into serious decline or worse.

I don't see how China can develop into the next phase of economic development with such an oppressive system. Industry and constrained science can clearly advance under such control. But media, branding, and cultural influence are much more strongly hindered by an oppressive state.

Before China can shift from building products and things into building brands and ideas, they will need to open up their society to compete globally.

You do have a point here. I think it's mostly due to the fact there's very little information about China available on Western media, so people just do not have access to the latest insights. This explains why most of them are still operating based on old beliefs.

Ironically this is probably serving China even better as they were able to keep everything undetected that it often becomes too late by the time people notice what's going on. Huawei is such a perfect example of this.

You are correct. I think the reason why is the article puts the 'why' very deeply inside and that reason is central planning. Xi will soon be God-emperor for life and China will continue to enjoy the benefits of an authoritative structure. Not to derail but while this is an article about cities it is disingenuous not to talk about contractors,zoning laws,city council, nimby, etc which the cities you have quoted have had to suffer. Shanghai does not have to face these challenges as one man can just say 'no'.

Absolute dictators always get things done that might be impossible in any kind of democracy or republic. However they only remain dictators for the life as long as things keep working, and often it requires brutal suppression of people in general. One wrong move and an economy that crumbles leaving people angry, confused and poor, and dictator is gone. When you put all your country's eggs in one person's basket, someday it will fail, or possibly the next dictator for life is a moron. Haiti is a great example of this with Papa Doc having had absolute power, and Baby Doc being an absolute moron.

You are quite right, China is certainly not an exception here.

What many in the West don't know is that prior to Xi, the political leadership had little engagement in operating the country during Jiang and Hu.

For most Jiang and Hu eras, senior civil administrators were picked on processional basis, with some not even being party members as such. With Xi, things went upside down on this front.

Living in China allowed me to see just how many nation's official are not in line with Xi. Many can barely hold from doing a "facepalm manoeuvre" when listening to Xi's many gaffes.

It's not a surprise that Xi has initiated a massive campaign to clear out government cadres appointed through civic line of work, and appoint party members instead.

Xi will not succeed, the party simply doesn't have enough professionals to staff the civil government. This may sound like a big stretch with CCP having 80M+ members, but only around 5M members make the real political body of the party, with prime majority of them being either "lazy golden boys" or pension age people.

Hu maybe, but Jiang? I remember him being a lot more hands on than Hu, but it was also a different more centralized era on the boundary.

Jiang was also way more educated than Xi, the former being a product of rushed post cultural revolution education (Xi is less educated than Hu, being the first Chinese President in a while who can’t speak English).

I meant it in the sense that they kept the mess of party's internal politics away from state institutes.

> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18527344

> With all Jiang Zemin's flaws, his best move was to "politically castrate" the party, and distance intra-party affairs from state governance. This is what made the two decades of progress possible: civil servants without little red books instead of brains.

In early nineties, CPC was a buzzing hornet's nest. It was the wisest decision to not to touch it, and let the party "simmer in its own juice," while creating parallel state institutes with complete outsiders.

> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17337985

> It was in Jiang's times when things turned "position in the party !== automatic position in the government." Jiang was waaay to afraid of party members. He saw the party as a dual structure:

> 1. An assembly of oafs, and loosers

> 2. Along with a hornet's nest of Maoists, Hua-ists, Deng-ists, and 20 other "ists," all of whom were a threat to his rule.

I met a traveller from an antique land, Who said—“Two vast and trunkless legs of stone Stand in the desert. . . . Near them, on the sand, Half sunk a shattered visage lies, whose frown, And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command, Tell that its sculptor well those passions read Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things, The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed; And on the pedestal, these words appear: My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings; Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair! Nothing beside remains. Round the decay Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare The lone and level sands stretch far away.”

although really from the perspective of battling NIMBYs, the benefit (first-order, anyway) of Shanghai is not that one man can say no, it's that only one man has to say "yes"

> Had the article been about Mumbai, Lagos or Karachi I'm doubtful such reactions would have been elicited.

I think this is the key point. We're coming up on the thirtieth anniversary of the crack down:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Tiananmen_Square_protests

The protests starting 1989-04-15; martial law was declared May 20; tanks rolled in June 4.

I don't know man?

I'm pretty sure you'd get the same sort of comments if someone made a positive article about Lagos. (I'm fair certain it would even happen for similar articles on Mumbai and Karachi. Just maybe not quite as bad as for Lagos.)

It's natural for there to be cultural insecurity during times of realignment. And I think it's fair to say that we are living through a period of realignment, transition, whatever you want to call it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com