Why "the West" gets China wrong

solarz said:

This statement gets repeated often, but is never backed up by any convincing evidence.

The fact is, the Chinese government is engaged in a massive urbanization effort. Millions upon millions of people have and will be moving out of rural villages and into cities. This alone means housing prices will not be falling anytime soon in China.

Click to expand...

The problem is that those poor people coming from the countryside can't afford any of the houses on offer and many real estate remains empty in the cities. The reason why prices are not falling is that in alot of the cases the bank refuse to put pressure on these developers to repay loans. So the developers can let the houses stay empty and sit out the down turn hoping to sell when the price goes up again. House prices falling will be a good thing for China in the long run even if it causes some short term pains.

If you want to know why all the media are singing from the same hymm sheet when it comes to China or other international issue's. Well there is a reason for that and even a word its called "narrative building". They have divided up the world into the "good guys" and the "bad guys" and for them China falls in to the latter categorie. But to be fair its not just the media in the West that does that all media around the world does that.

To the question rather the West is "after China". I think they would if they could but for now there is nothing they can do about China because China has become too strong. They can't touch countries like China or Russia without cutting deep into their own flesh. But if you think that they won't if they had the chance just look at what they did to Iraq, Yugoslavia, Iran, Libya and now Syria.

ahadicow said:

I already did. CPC does not allow billion dollar multi-national companies to run China becuase CPC is running China. In america, whatever makes money, and there is no law prohibiting it specifically, has a right to operate. That is not the case in PRC. In China, bussiness need to provide good service to the "people"(subject to the definition of CPC). That means the state is in control of the bussiness (whether private or publically owned), That's very different from how things are run in the west. Consumerism is the culture of honoring material consumption. Government intervention that stops or slows down consumption is a big no-no in the west.(government intervention that increaces consumption is very good, on the other hand). CPC regularly intervenes and don't tend to give a sh*t about consumption. That's why, in the eyes of consumerist cultures, CPC is a unruly state, a rogue state. The evil things CPC did includes: not allowing people to have more then one child, restricting the amount of products individual can consume, not allowing business to do whatevery they want in making money, not allowing people to say whatever they want in making money, produce more than it comsumes. It is rather clear that CPC does not recongnize human needs for material consumption as the highest virtue and that's enough to condamn it.

Click to expand...

The bottom line is China is a fast rising superpower and the western world is on a rapid decline (most people know this). By 2030 China will become the top economic power and financial power, one of the top technological powers, major political power and I'm willing to bet top military power by 2040.
The things you listed is exactly why China is surpassing the west. China is succeeding the Chinese way, not the western way. You believe the only way to succeed is the western way, thats nonsense. There are multiple ways to succeed without becoming western. China is a perfect example.

Consumerism is the reason the west is on the decline, too much borrowing to consume has accumulated staggering levels of debt (US, UK, Greece, Spain, Italy, Ireland) which cannot be paid off due to low growth. The only reason the west can consume beyond its means is due to the major reserve currencies being western (dollar, euro, pound). Without those reserve currencies, there is not a chance these countries can live beyond their means.
The global demand for these currencies (due to their use in trade, investment and finance transactions) keeps them strong even when you run big deficits. There is an artificial demand for these currencies globally which allows western consumers to go into big deficits and live beyond its means.

Without these reserve currencies, the power of the west will be much much lower than it is now. China knows this, which is why they are starting to internationalise the Renminbi to provide competition to western currencies.

Franklin said:

The problem is that those poor people coming from the countryside can't afford any of the houses on offer and many real estate remains empty in the cities. The reason why prices are not falling is that in alot of the cases the bank refuse to put pressure on these developers to repay loans. So the developers can let the houses stay empty and sit out the down turn hoping to sell when the price goes up again. House prices falling will be a good thing for China in the long run even if it causes some short term pains.

Click to expand...

While that may be true for migrant workers, you are forgetting a significantly different aspect of rural urbanization: rural kids who go to university and end up with a good paying job.

Granted, they are the minority compared to migrant workers, but it is *NOT* the migrant workers who will be urbanized. Some migrant workers manage to succeed by going into business. The vast majority of them are in the city to earn some money for their family. And guess what the foremost use of that money goes to? To pay for the university education of their kids.

Remember that this urbanization has been going on since the 90's. There's a reason the process takes decades.

On a different note, the reason I started this thread is not to once again rehash the western anti-china bias topic. Rather, I am more interested in talking about the misunderstandings that people living in the West have about the dynamics of Chinese society.

I bet even a lot of forumites know about China through western-media sound-bites. I will also be the first to admit that there are a lot of things I don't know about China, since I only visit once every couple of years. I'd really like to discuss those things instead of the whole bias issue.

Here's another article, this time trying to compare Xi Jinping with Yuan Shikai.

Once again, we have this blind worship at the altar of democracy. The author does not realize that the 1911 revolution was far less about democracy than about overthrowing a corrupt and ineffectual feudal system.

I seriously don't know why they will compare Yuan to Xi. I don't like CCP, but CCP is nothing compared to what Yuan was. Yuan was literally a Saddam Hussein..dictatorship, totalitarianism, etc..
CCP isn't democratic, still authoritarian, still plenty of dark stuff...but there's a lot more attempt in participation, and much more republic..

The Economist does not even make an attempt at masking its xenophobia and political aganda, it makes mockery of any countries not U.S. it's a magzine for reader that somehow believe "economist" is a profession of esteem. I would not give it to represent "opinions in the west" in any shape of form.

ahadicow said:

The Economist does not even make an attempt at masking its xenophobia and political aganda, it makes mockery of any countries not U.S. it's a magzine for reader that somehow believe "economist" is a profession of esteem. I would not give it to represent "opinions in the west" in any shape of form.

Click to expand...

Many of these writers aren't even experts anyways.

I'm just in conclusion of this:

Pro-China supporters are biased, bashers are definitely biased, many so-called experts are biased, many journalists arent experts.

The only real expert are those who will analyze without being pro-China and wont dismiss critics as simply "the West", but also tries real hard to understand the areas that China is doing right, and where it's doing right and wrong, and why.

airsuperiority said:

Many of these writers aren't even experts anyways.

I'm just in conclusion of this:

Pro-China supporters are biased, bashers are definitely biased, many so-called experts are biased, many journalists arent experts.

The only real expert are those who will analyze without being pro-China and wont dismiss critics as simply "the West", but also tries real hard to understand the areas that China is doing right, and where it's doing right and wrong, and why.

Click to expand...

I think you're going to be disappointed there. *EVERYBODY* has an agenda, it's only a question of whether you can see it or not.

That's why it's important to be able to read between the lines and cut through the BS.

I guess I preferred to look into this thread and see some 'Chinese' qualities perhaps those who reported on China didn't understand when they wrote an article (Perhaps a concept like Guanxi). A focus on individual articles and author's rather than Western Media as a whole.

Instead I saw more general Western media bashing. Accusations of brainwashing and a deliberate unified collaborative western media effort against China, as well as worse, all in very provoking emotional language from all from the usual suspects.

You know, the reason why the topic was created, but just the shoe on the other foot.

There are those who inject quality in this thread, efforts from Solarz, airsuperiority, and advill among others.

I thank them for trying to stay objective, refraining from general judgements, and attempting to keep their emotions from running wild on the topic, I know it can be hard depending on the topic and have been guilty of it more than once. Well only human .

airsuperiority said:

I seriously don't know why they will compare Yuan to Xi. I don't like CCP, but CCP is nothing compared to what Yuan was. Yuan was literally a Saddam Hussein..dictatorship, totalitarianism, etc..
CCP isn't democratic, still authoritarian, still plenty of dark stuff...but there's a lot more attempt in participation, and much more republic..

Click to expand...

There's also the fact that Yuan was well known as a backstabbing traitor. First, he betrayed the Reformers to Cixi, then he betrayed the Qing Dynasty to the revolutionaries, then he betrayed the revolutionaries to seize power, and finally, as the straw that broke the camel's back, he betrayed the entire nation of China by declaring himself emperor.