You touch on an important point. China’s paternalistic attitude extends not only to citizens but to foreign nations. They may proclaim equality but their behavior towards their neighbor clearly reveals a desire for overt subordination of their neighbors.

That may be changing though. China has entered into a close alliance with Russia. And Russia too is attempting form it’s own version of modernity, albeit one more free and respectful towards its citizenry. We’re going to see increased cultural exchange between these two behemoths in the years to come, especially in the foreign policy arena as China learns the lessons of a newly prestigious Russia.

So your points may be less of a problem than you suspect, because China has selected a teacher that has also had to deal with all these problems more or less successfully.

I also suspect, unlike Pillsbury, that the CCP is going down the path of transforming itself once again. I don’t think it will be recognizable in 10 years. But that’s a subject for another post.

The human rights situation inside China today is said to be worse than at any time since Mao. China expects its citizens to find their own version of ‘modernity’ behind the isolation of a Firewall, meanwhile imposing its will on neighbouring countries. For me, isolation itself has become as strong a factor in China’s future as any Warring States manual. The Marathon itself may be no more than the best option the CCP has to indefinitely hold onto power, rewriting China’s history in the minds of its own people and by extension, any nations that it may eventually come to dominate.

Anyway, it’s a meaty topic worth exploring. Thanks for taking the time to put the post together.

As a thought experiment, look at Tim Cook”s claims: Only China was realistic. What if the Chinese state had a critical role in pulling the Apple projects in China together? I consider it highly likely since the Chinese would never let a foreign company of that grandeur and prestige go without sweetening the deal for themselves. Perhaps it was only realistic in China because the Party said so?

I’m with you on the intentions of Cook. Probably honest on his part. But the Chinese leadership are not honest about these things. Just speculation and food for thought at this stage, unless a massive info dump reveals sensitive Apple emails with the Chinese state.

Actually, Tim Cook said it was. Just not for the reason people expect. They needed to start production at a scale that required 6,000 trained engineers. That wouldn’t be easy to put together in America without a lot of cost, effort, and time. But China’s previous investments (so I am not entirely denying the author’s point) ensured that this WAS available in China – quickly. Cook basically said that China was their only realistic option.

Are the Chinese crass enough to attempt open colonization? They can’t realistically think that will work.

They might be trying to pull what the Jews pull in Western countries, and what Chinese people have done in Singapore and the Phillipines: Export enough citizens to create a self-perpetuating community that becomes the new ruling class. This could be likely.

I’d definitely say that the West is responding though. Hopefully I’ll have a chance to post on it, but the bankrupting in the desert is intentional. The American targeting of North Africa is intentional. The polarizing of Europe is intentional. Some Americans are playing the long game too. Don’t let them fool you. Both the Chinese and Americans are trying to play each other. We’ll see who wins in the next few years when the financial consequences settle in.

As to the quality of their measures I entirely agree. This is the country that builds roads to nowhere after all. Literally roads to nowhere. And I’ve seen their attitude towards imitation many times do. They do copy things just for the sake of doing it. Luckily for them they only need a few projects to succeed and can literally throw money at the rest of them.

But as you noted, Senior members of the country’s governing elite are a different breed. It selects for the strong and the talented. Remember that a previous golden boy was purged not so long ago, poor Bo Xilai and his Chongqing model with him.

As for the theft, that’s reading too much into it. It’s just wiser to steal. Israel does too, and nobody would accuse them of being unwilling to develop technology. It’s simply a profitable way to gain these tools.

Remember that when dealing with elites, High IQ cunning is the norm, not the exception. Take it into account when analyzing policies. As you can see, I do.

After working there for three years, I can say with confidence that their economic and social measures are often terrible (both inaccurate and / or non-strategic), but measured because they believe that if another country measures a thing, then they should to.

Further, the patient nature of the Chinese in general is just patently untrue. Perhaps a limited exception for the senior-most Politbureau members and their vision for the country can be created, but it would be a rather constrained formulation. Even the country’s wholesale theft of Western technology is evidence of the leadership’s unwillingness to spend the time developing such tech itself.