As an academic and journalist working throughout East Asia, Martin Jacques has had a front row seat for the past decade on China’s economic and political emergence. The British author’s latest book is titled When China Rules the World.
Q: We in the West spend a great deal of time discussing China’s rise. But we seem to resist the next logical step, which is to consider how things will change around the world when China becomes the world’s pre-eminent economic power. Why is that?
A: I think that the world has been so used to American hegemony, and you had a recent period of American history under Bush which actually postulated exactly the opposite scenario—that we were in fact on the eve of a new American century. So we’re just not versed in the profoundly different thinking China’s pre-eminence will require. More than that, we have failed to understand that we’re not just talking about economic change. The impact of China’s rise is going to be at least as great politically and culturally as it will be in economic terms.
Q: So paint me a picture, in broad strokes. If, as some forecast, China’s GDP surpasses that of the U.S. in the next 20 years, how will China behave on the world stage?
A: Initially, I don’t expect it to behave hugely differently. Even in 2050, when it’s projected that the Chinese economy will be twice as large as that of the United States, China will still be, in terms of GDP per head, a lot poorer than the United States. But history’s very important in the behaviour of nations, and China comes from profoundly different civilizational coordinates than the West; it has a different history from the top dogs than we’re used to over the last 200 years. I think that the West is going to feel extremely disoriented by the world that is in the process of now being made. We’ve so long assumed that the furniture is our furniture, the language is our language, the sports played are our sports, the values are our values, the skin colour is our skin colour. My son’s 10, and his generation is going to grow up in a very, very different kind of world.
Q: You put a lot of focus on the fact that China is not just a nation-state but a civilization. Why is that an important distinction?
A: Consider the characteristics that give the Chinese a sense of their own identity. It lies in the language, the Confucian values as they apply to society and governance, and part and parcel of that is the notion of the state as family. Central to that is the centrality of the state in its role as the guardian of civilization. These things are civilizational characteristics, not the characteristics of a nation-state.
Q: How is that going to affect China’s relations with other countries?
A: If we want to try and understand what China’s going to be like, then the best place to start looking is East Asia, because that is China’s own region. China’s culture has had a major influence on the whole region in varying degrees for thousands of years—most obviously in the case of Japan, Korea and Vietnam. It’s a very sophisticated culture from its language to its literature to its food. These are elements of what we’ve termed soft power, and Chinese soft power is going to be hugely influential in East Asia in the future. There’s also the pure arithmetic of it, which is that with a population of 1.4 billion people, China dominates the region. The region accounts for one-third of the world’s population, and because China’s so large—both in terms of geographic expanse but in this case particularly population—there’s a huge imbalance between it and all the other countries within the region.
Q: That inequality is an important theme in your book. You predict, among other things, a return to the old “tributary” system in East Asia, in which surrounding countries supported China and served its ends.
A: Yeah, I doubt the wording will be the same—they won’t use the term “tributary.” But I wouldn’t be surprised if aspects of the system came back. It survived, after all, for many thousands of years and only disappeared at the end of the 19th century. The other thing to remember is there are now large Chinese minorities in Southeast Asia in particular, in countries like Malaysia and Indonesia and Thailand. Chinese civilization has a powerful centripetal quality to it. Wherever they are, for instance, the Chinese will eat Chinese food, and they don’t necessarily lose their language in the second or third generation. They have a strong sense of being Chinese and identifying with the Middle Kingdom as the centre of this phenomenon. So these elements will, I think, come together to not simply place China at the centre of the East Asian economy, but to set the terms of the whole region’s emergence. Another point is that China will have a very hierarchical view of the world, because the Chinese are very hierarchical in their mentality.
Q: Yes, and I get the sense that this is a proverbial elephant in the room. Until I read your book, I had only a vague idea of how big a role racism and ideas of cultural superiority play in China’s culture. You describe a very retrograde strain of prejudice that is literally based on the hue of one’s skin.
A: This is my greatest single concern about China’s rise, because those kinds of views are very difficult to change. The most difficult problem the Chinese are going to face, I think, is trying to make any sense of [racial and ethnic] difference. I mean, 92 per cent of them think of themselves as of the same race. While this is clearly not true—the Han Chinese are in fact descended from many different races—it gives a kind of biological reason for Chinese unity. And you can see it in their attitude toward those within China’s borders who have not been integrated in this way. The Tibetans or the Uighurs in Xinjiang province, for example, are regarded as needing to be helped up to the level of the Han Chinese. It’s a patronizing and very assimilationist attitude.
Q: I thought Mao tried to suppress those sorts of ideas.
A: Yes, but they have never gone away. What’s even more striking about this is China’s had such a bad time since the Opium Wars in the mid-19th century until 1949, what they call the Century of Humiliation, when China clearly had a terrible time in all sorts of different ways, losing territory and facing abject poverty. Yet somehow this attitude, this sense of Chinese self-confidence and superiority, has survived that period, as well as the period since 1949. It’s a very remarkable characteristic.
Print
Comment
The odd thing about this discussion, like most discussions about ascendant nations, is the unquestioned assumption that democracy is superior to and more free than other forms of government. This is very questionable.
The other odd bit in this interview is the last paragraph: "Why is time on China’s side? Because it’s growing so quickly, and with that big population, they can afford to play a waiting game. "
China's population growth is going to fall off a cliff within two generations. They've limited family sizes below replacement level and with sex-selective abortion the new generation is disproportionately male. The math is obvious yet for some reason this author doesn't even mention it.
The odd thing about this discussion, like most discussions about ascendant nations, is the unquestioned assumption that democracy is superior to and more free than all other forms of government. This is very questionable.
The other odd bit in this interview is the last paragraph: "Why is time on China’s side? Because it’s growing so quickly, and with that big population, they can afford to play a waiting game. "
China's population growth is going to fall off a cliff within two generations. They've limited family sizes below replacement level and with sex-selective abortion the new generation is disproportionately male. The math is obvious yet for some reason this author doesn't even mention it.
The worst form of government, except for all the others!
Despite the dispropotionality of China's gender levels, it's still going to take a while before the population really drops down. After all, two generations is mostly like 50 years, and that's enough time for a lot of change. The one factor about that is problematic is, psychologically, males will feel the pressures of competition. Socially, this could lead to a number of problems, and I have a feeling that rape crimes will go up dramatically over the next few years unless the policy is changed.
As for your opinion in democracy, I think I agree with you. China's current political structure does not hinder the lives of the people that they protect. And I CAN say this because I am Chinese and I have lived in China and US both for quite some time.
Regarding democracy, you have misunderstood my position. I despise China's current political structure. It is not free and does indeed hinder the lives of its people, most obviously in terms of religious and family freedom.
My point was not intended to praise China's current system, but rather to criticize the unquestioned premise held by both the interviewer and the author that democracy is the government for which China should strive. Even interpreting "democracy" loosely to mean "representative government" this is still a debatable premise, so it would have been a better interview (and probably a better book) with other possibilities considered.
Canada, as we know it, will be gone within 50 years. Traditional Canadians, especially Quebecers, simply aren't reproducing. However new Canadians are as well as first nations Canadians-2.2 and mennonites, Amish and a few other Christian groups are doing an excellent job in reproduction. The old exhausted, liberated, liberal, Canadian of European background has set the stage for it's own replacement.
who will play hockey…a bunch of small chinese players….hmmm interesting
Hockey will go the way the women's curling, Chinese won, and then, nobody wants to watch it anymore, because, ping pong will rule the day.
He is an expert on China and doesn't know that it was Chou Enlai and not Deng Xiaoping who make the famous reply to Kissinger.
China funded Robert Mugabe and his war back in the 70s. The Chinese dragon is ravanous and Africa has the raw materials needed. Canadians are one of the largest groups of Investors into Africa. I wonder if they are seeing a Chinese influence?
For millennia, Han Chinese (the Zhong Guoans) have viewed the periphery as populated by barbarians and it is a mark of Chinese history to “civilize”, “pacify” and “sinicize” (bring them under Chinese cultural, economic and genetic influence). Tibet, Tangut and Nan-Chao were independent kingdoms until “recently” by historical standards. Of course, Chinese are aware of ethnic minorities, but they will use these “quaint people” as tourist attractions (e.g., Shangri-La). Chinese society is convinced of their cultural superiority (remember the big opening show at the Peking Olympics) and they have long-term economic goals (US treasury bonds). They need natural resources (gas and oil) to achieve their goal of becoming the dominating global power. Now the whole world (including vancouver lol) is considered the "periphery" by the Chinese and the ex[pansion process will continue for the next 1000 years. Ultimately history is always written by the “conquerors” , whoever they may be!
"Q: Let’s switch to politics. You talk about China offering an alternative political model to developing countries—something different from the blend of democracy and free markets prescribed by the United States. What would that model be?
A: Well, for one thing, it takes a more favourable view of the state as a force in society and the economy. Unlike in Western societies"….blah blah blah.
Yo schmuck, the word your looking for is FASCIST. And surprise surprise, the Chinese are the most racist and chauvinistic punks on the planet. Who'd a thunk it? No worries though, the facts ot the matter are that china is a slave empire built on a sea of sand. To the extent that they are experiencing growth now, the primary catalyst has been WalMart and the American consumer. No Americans buying shoddy/cheap/easy credit goods, no more Chinese growth. No growth, no peace. The Chinese have a historical habit of murdering their leaders when they can't make it rain. We live in interesting times. LOL
So many people on this board are so ignorant. Is this a truly world class example of literates representing Canada? Even though this article may seem pro-China, you have to consider that this person actually HAS BEEN to China first of all and resides there. This author shows an example of his understanding of the thought process behind Chinese civilization unlike the rest of you morons. China has in the past 200 years faced unquestionable turmoil due to the imperial powers like Britain, Japan, USSR, USA. The only difference is that China ended up enduring and surviving and made it's way back to the global stage. If you do not think that is remarkable then you are just bias. Never in history has a 3rd world nation advanced and progressed and this fast a rate. The CCP has transformed a backwards, poor, war-torn country into a leader in this globalization age. Please refrain from talking nonsense like "kumarright123", "william", they come off as lame ducks.
The pinyin spelling is Zhou not Chou and give the guy a break; it was an interview!
When Zhou En Lai obtained his first foreign name, it was spelled "Chou", not "Zhou". Just like Mao Tse-tung is well-known to the world long before the Chinese communist changed the spelling system and spelled chairman's name as Mao Zedong.
The best form of government is Rule of Law, organized as a Republic. Democracy is a component of that best of systems. Read Guy Sorman's (he's French) book "Empire of Lies." He says the Chinese leaders, since imperial times, have fed the West a line of bull about Chinese are different, can't use, don't understand, don't want freedom and democracy. And as pointed out above, the Chinese will ensure that those on their periphery will see and do things the Chinese way, too, or else.
Avidyananda
The best (one of them) is in the interview: "What I wanted to try and explain in the book is that we shouldn’t simply see Western democracy as a universal. It needs to be considered in its proper historical and cultural context. No Western country was, by the standards that we use now, democratic when it went through its process of industrialization. " and I will add Samual Huntington: "The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion, but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do".
Thats an overly simplistic view. Why was the West superior in applying organized violence? Simple: They had better technology. Muskets and locomotives are superior to spears and dogsleds any day.
Now, how were they able to acquire said technology? They had a religion and a set of values that fostered a culture of freedom and ideas. And it is from those ideas that advancement, progress, and technology sprung. Sure, it came with organized violence as a side-effect, but the world is undoubtedly a better place today because of it.
Interesting POV, but fails to address demographic issues , corruption, evolving legal systems and finally effect of the communist dogma on the model of state "guidance". Can the state and it's leadership (however clever and well educated) make better longer term decisions than a truly free market. Can you ignore human nature, the desire for power ? This is not even a Singapore model. Democracy enables nations to survive great stress, challenges and endure. Fascism, socialism with a strong state…not so much. Will the system be able to stand the stress and complexities of a modern growing economy and deliver sufficient employment and increases in the standard of living ? The Chinese people are happy to cede individual rights, as long as they can make money. When they can't, or don't want to compete with the "insiders" within the government..how will they react ?
Great comment and lots of points, I just say one. The rise of China is not a rise of socialism, but rather the application of free market ideas. Chinese economy is much freer than you think., that combine with state power (Obama is emulating that with great bank and car industry bailout), gives them advantages.
yes John i agree with your insight especially the cultural diversity and economic issues as they relate to western society, democracies aside, the answer lies within the pollution of corruption, greed and individual rights ad infinitum…when human nature stares us in the face of all we disdain and fight for…is human nature Western or Chinese? maybe therein lies the power
Stop complaining, folks.
When China rules the world, we will all adopt much tastier and healthier food. Bonus One.
Gawky Western women will work hard to be slimmer and lither, like the beautiful Chinese. Bonus Two
Isn't that progress?
It will be far worse when INDIA rules the world…….
Kumar,
You are extremely rude and offensive. How dare you make such a comment about women who have naturally larger builds and a lot of positive attributes. Imagine someone writing that about people's skin being too dark or the skinner women not having breasts. You have no class and no sense!
Come on, Mr Jacques. Have a sense of reality.
CHINA WILL NEVER RULE THE WORLD.
The world will gang up against China to make sure of that.
China is big, sure. But the US plus Japan plus India plus Indonesia plus Vietnam plus Korea plus Russia (forget flabby Europe) is more than enough to contain the Chinese.
I regret that, myself. I'm Indian, but do want better food and slimmer women in the West, which needs Chinese rule.
Racism exists regardless of culture and race because it is in fact a human emotion of fear and uncertainty. We all live on this planet and there is NO SINGLE owner. If China has the potential to come out on top, that will certainly change the status quo on the Anglo-saxon dominated world in which we live in now. Again the People's Republic of China is only 60 years old, you have to take that into consideration. The CCP inherited a history and culture more than 2,000 years old and has transformed the nation overnight. Do you think the leaders of China or the Chinese people are that stupid? It is only your loss to underestimate and if you think I'm brainwashed, I can only remind you to think of yourself first.
Further problem for China:
The Han population is going to decline sharply over the next two generations due to the one-child policy. The minority nationalities. especially the Muslims, will greatly increase proportionately (they don't have to follow the one-child policy).
So China will be crippled by an large and explosive Muslim minority.
ho ho ho !!!!!
>"The Tibetans or the Uighurs in Xinjiang province, for example, are regarded as needing to be helped up to the level of the Han Chinese. It’s a patronizing and very assimilationist attitude." "This is my greatest single concern about China’s rise, because those kinds of views are very difficult to change."
That's hilarious considering that's the exact kind of condescending, patronising attitude the West protrudes throughout the world and he's lecturing China…
A: Yes. She died as a result of Chinese racism in the hospital.
What exactly is "Chinese racism"? Seems counterintuitive to accuse people of apparent racism by framing said racism in a racial tone.
JR:
"Chinese racism" is racism that Chinese people practise. It just means to say Chinese can be racist, too.
the sooner chinese are considered human beings like you and I and not aliens the better. No more us and them.
we are all together as on race
Funny because Chinese are the most racist. Now that's scary.
Krmarright:
Are you telling me Chinese people practice a different kind of racism from everyone else? Why frame by race in the first place, as far as I know racism is racism regardless which ethnicity practices it. I've never heard people say my wife died because of Canadian racism.
JR Blake:
No, I'm just telling you you practice a different kind of English than any literate person.
My meaning is crystal clear: by "Chinese racism" is meant that the Chinese can be racist, just as "Chinese steel" does not mean a different kind of steel, but steel belonging to China in some way.
Geddit now?
China is different: a culture needs resources, it over-exploits those locally available and looks for them less locally, over exploits those to the 'chagrin' of the locals assimilated, usurped or destroyed; now it looks less locally. In the process of adventurous exploitation it identifies those assimilated, usurped or destroyed as less powerful, less cultural, less important, backward, worthless… I only describe the attitudes of every past civilization on earth: USA against African and North American Natives; Australia against its Natives; England, France, Nederlands against African and Asian and Oceanic Natives; Spain against South American Natives; Portugal against African and Asian Natives; Germanic/Frankish tribes against the Romans; Romans against the Europe and the Mediterraneans… How far back should I go?
The Han-isation of Chinese controlled territory and its economic allies elswhere is no different… Racism, why not? It worked and still works in the US, Europe and any country you care to mention. Culture: We probably eat as many soybeans cole crops, etc as they; they have their literature, we have ours; we have our technology and have given it to them: just like the USA usurped British tech 1-200 years ago, and Europe usurped Roman, and Roman usurped Greek and Levantine tech. Hierarchy works fine too. Go to work an exert your Magna Carta, US Bill of Rights, or Droit d'Homme, Okay, so you get a sixth of your life to watch television and pay your ISP for online advertising and catalogs, don't be silly, consumerism isn't freedom. Religion? Mine is always better than yours, even if I have none. What is so different? The language? Mine is better than yours, so what.
Grow up people, China will take over, it has more people and money to throw at us (what ever the competition) than we at them, plus we're afraid to die (except virtually). But different? I think not.
Maybe we should analyze ourselves, see what we did, to avoid the fate we delivered on our vanquished. Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it. It may be western civilization's turn to repeat it.