Over on the member feed, Cas Balicki, Paules, Scott Reusser and I have been having a conversation about China.  

Cas got it started. When Prince Hans Adam suggested on Uncommon Knowledge that China would one day become democratic, Cas insisted, the good prince was displaying a crude naivete. I replied that I wasn't so sure. Here's one reason why.

Having a cup of coffee here at Stanford a couple of years ago, I found myself approached by an amiable young Asian man who spoke English with a thick Chinese accent.  He explained that he was doing graduate work in Sino-American relations, then requested my permission to ask a personal question.  "Someone told me you were a speechwriter for President Ronald Reagan.  Is that true?"  I allowed that it was.  "And that you wrote his 'tear down this wall speech.'  Is that true, too?"  Again, I said that it was.  "Oh," he replied, grinning with delight, "what an honor to meet someone who worked for that great man.  What an honor!"  He kept grinning, and he more or less bowed a couple of times. To change the subject--I can take flattery, but I draw the line at bowing--I asked what he intended to do when he completed his studies.  "Go back to Beijing" he replied. "You see, I am a member of the foreign ministry."

I know, I know. An anecdote is merely an anecdote, and there are plenty of aspects of the Communist regime--the one child policy, for example--that remain, simply, inhuman.  But an employee of foreign ministry, enthusing over Ronald Reagan.  That can't have been a bad sign, right?

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

Claire Berlinski, Ed.

Well, I agree that this is a more encouraging response than, say, "I curse you and your ancestors." But I don't think it means much, I'm sad to say. I'm not an expert on Chinese culture, but my experience is that this is a typical example of Chinese good manners--Eastern good manners generally, which seem to rely on flattery quite a bit. 

Of course, it is an honor to meet someone who worked for that great man and who wrote that speech, but I think he could have been expected to say that whether or not he fully recognized it. 

Sisyphus
Joined
Jul '10
Sisyphus

He would not have made the contact without reason.  If he made overtures to develop an acquaintance, it might be a bit of clandestine foolery.  But even a Chinese patriot might have a heartfelt admiration for a strong adversary.  I have always respected Bill Clinton's political skill, if not his politics or tactics.

On the flip side, there is something odd that I have seen happen even in our own "foreign ministry" where Foreign Officers will develop such an affinity for their host nation that they practically go native.  And, of course, there is the press.  CNN, pre-compromised by Saddam's goons. Others so affected by the poverty or the brutishness or the exotic customs that they lose touch with the big picture.

Perhaps your guy is a little bit seduced by the legend of Reaganism and the city on the hill.

Edited on Nov 27, 2010 at 12:27am
Cas Balicki
Joined
Jun '10
Cas Balicki

Peter let me write at the outset that you should not feel flattered by the fact that you wrote Ronald Reagan’s speeches, but that you should be very rightly proud of that fact. Now to move on to your young foreign ministry man. Everyone I speak to who has had a close experience with China comes back with the same story, which is that the Chinese are academically top notch while being creatively stunted. It is this creativity that the Chinese are desperately trying to jump start.

Looking at Nobel Laureates we learn that in Physics and Mathematics the prize winners are all young. Indeed, it we take Einstein as an example, his big year was 1905. In that year he published four significant papers including The Law of Photoelectric Effect for which he won the Nobel prize in physics in 1921 and Special Relativity, for which he should have won the Nobel, but which no one at the time understood enough to know what the heck he was on about.  There is no other way to describe this sort of smarts except with the adjective bumptious. Continued...

Edited on Nov 27, 2010 at 8:10am
Cas Balicki
Joined
Jun '10
Cas Balicki

In 1905 Einstein was twenty-six years old, and working in the Swiss patent office because no University would hire him. Now contrast physics and mathematics with law and the slow acquisition of wisdom by judges. Most often judges don’t reach their intellectual peak until well into a long career on the bench, and then only after becoming experts in stare decisis, which is another way of writing don’t rock the boat.

What has this to do with your foreign policy wonk? Only this: He is most likely going to go back to China and not rock the boat. Peter, you wrote a sound, albeit, short defense of the Chinese Communist party in the member thread, and I was forced to concede my more hard-line position; but when it comes to justification based on the perceived common weal, I would only point out what you so well know—having authored “Tear down this wall, Mr. Gorbachev”—that much blood has been spilled in the name of the public weal. Unfortunately, what China may need most is less urban prosperity and more political freedom. But that would require creativity, something that communists do not possess in abundance. 

Edited on Nov 27, 2010 at 1:05am
Lance
Joined
Nov '10
Lance

At the risk of coming across as fanboy I really am, I can't pass up this opportunity to thank you, Peter, for the amazing service to your President and your countrymen, namely me.  

I was a teenager in high school when I first heard those words.  They were the first great words I remember hearing.  They were strong.  They were clear.  They were...great.  I keep my ears open for words of similar import and conviction to be said again and find myself wanting.

In my career in the modern cubic corporate world, I celebrated my first office with a picture of the president at the gates, adorned with his famous words in clear, bold print and placed it in a place easy to be seen by visitors in my office.  I meant to send a dual message: one to my team, letting them know I was committed to leading them, and the other to the suppliers with whom I negotiated, letting them know that I took my responsibilities very seriously.  To both, I would fight for what I felt was right.

This, Peter, is how your work trickled down and rose up.  

Thank you very, very much. 

Lady Kurobara
Joined
Nov '10
Lady Kurobara

"And now, for something completely different..."

From the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/5280312.stm

This tells us something about the Chinese, although exactly what is debatable.

Lady Kurobara
Joined
Nov '10
Lady Kurobara

On a more serious note:

One of my friends married a Chinese woman. A few years ago, they traveled to mainland China to visit her relatives, who live in the country. At that time, her father had recently been awarded a medal in recognition of his fight against the Japanese during WWII.

My friend was struck by the fact that, in the countryside, at least, the Chinese seem to be genuinely fond of Americans — mainly because of the "Flying Tigers."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Tigers

After all these years, the Chinese have not forgotten Claire Chennault and his band of crazy, swashbuckling adventurers. My friend opines that: "It was the best PR move America ever made in China."

The Chinese have long memories. That is good to keep in mind.

Edited on Nov 27, 2010 at 3:35pm
Pseudodionysius
Joined
Sep '10
Pseudodionysius

While not directly on the subject of China, I was wondering if anyone on Ricochet has read Shusaku Endo's Silence ?

Pseudodionysius
Joined
Sep '10
Pseudodionysius

Also, I don't think the Chinese will be tearing down their Great Wall anytime soon.

~Paules
Joined
Jun '10
~Paules

 I'm interested to know from anyone who might have expertise in the area what the mainland Chinese think about Taiwan and Singapore, and also how they view the Chinese diaspora abroad.  It seems to me that Singapore most especially points the way if only the mainlanders could adopt the same pedagogy for success.  What a mighty nation China could be if only the government would embrace liberty.

Bill Walsh

I think predicting the course of Chinese history is a fool's errand. The pattern seems to be long periods of apparent stability which suddenly collapse in massive, violent paroxysms in which millions upon millions die, and then something else, often quite different, emerges. It strikes me that China has a better base for some form of democracy than does, say, Russia. Something akin to Turkey might emerge with the wealthy coastal élites forming one political tendency (possibly more liberal) and the inland peasants forming another (looking to the center for stability and welfare). (Though East Turkistan and Tibet could make Turkey's Kurdish problem look like a question of dinner-party seating.)

That said, betting on happy endings is generally not the way to go in this vale of tears, but stranger things have happened. On this one, I'm with that Stalin apologist Haldane:

I have no doubt that in reality the future will be vastly more surprising than anything I can imagine. Now my own suspicion is that the Universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose. (Possible Worlds and Other Papers, 1927, 286.)

Bill Walsh

By the way, I'm not criticizing those who do guess at the future of China. Someone's going to get it right—and maybe even for the right reasons. It's fun and a necessary exercise, especially for say, war planners, and other high-level strategists (do we have those any more?). I just think that the complexities of history tend to confound prediction in most places, and China seems (for whatever reasons) to be particularly subject to massive discontinuities. (Which they seem to know—I mean, I think one reason they're so nasty to the Falun Gong people is that they have the precedent of the Taiping Rebellion in mind, where an off-the-wall religious movement blows the country to bits. I think it's a false analogy, but I rather suspect it's what's in their minds. Plus, to whatever degree it's meaningful anymore, they're Communists—and definitely autocrats.)

Scott Reusser
Joined
May '10
Scott Reusser

Now that the Chinese people are inching up Maslow's hierarchy of needs, Chinese nationalism and pride-in-self might, in time, lead to a more moral government.

Take the current fuss in Korea. It must be obvious even to the information-challenged Chinese that North Korea is the bad guy in this standoff. At some point won't the proud everyman in China--now that he is not so occupied with satisfying more basic needs--look at his own government with shame and disappointment for its siding with the manifest villian? If so, won't this force the party to take itty bitty steps toward moral behavior even if it isn't otherwise inclined? I bet yes.

At some level, a government craves and needs the support of its subjects. And if those proud and increasingly-worldly subjects crave the planet's admiration, the party leaders will have to reward them with good and decent behavior eventually.

Here, Peter's anecdote about the young grad student's admiration for America and its rhetoric is significant.

Cas Balicki
Joined
Jun '10
Cas Balicki

Scott, the problem with China and North Korea is that North Korea is a time bomb sitting on China's border. Yet the Chinese will do nothing about it on the principle that it is a wild card in its relations with the US. This to me seems the very essence of whack-job foreign policy, because if North Korea ever blows up, as it promises to any day now, the Chi-coms are going to have to deal with the mess. When China finally does something about North Korea on its own, without being coerced by international pressure, then we all can begin to think of it in more optimistic terms.

outstripp
Joined
May '10
outstripp

Peter,

We have to make strong distinction between Chinese people and Chinese society.

I have always found Chinese people to be extremely likable: unpretentious and intelligent.

But,Chinese society is another story.  There is something unpleasant about Chinese society. It is a zero-sum game that encourages deviousness and scheming.

It is Chinese society that the USA must deal with.

Scott Reusser
Joined
May '10
Scott Reusser
outstripp:[...]  There is something unpleasant about Chinese society. It is a zero-sum game that encourages deviousness and scheming. · Nov 27 at 6:40pm

Maybe the inertia from living for generations in the zero-sum game of communism....

Capitalism, we know--well, the lefties don't know it, but we do--is not zero sum. Maybe that deviousness and scheming will ease with time in an economy that better rewards virtue. 

Scott Reusser
Joined
May '10
Scott Reusser
Cas Balicki: [...] When China finally does something about North Korea on its own, without being coerced by international pressure, then we all can begin to think of it in more optimistic terms. · Nov 27 at 4:39pm

Gotcha, Cas. But in more general terms, do you think there's anything to the point that the increasingly self-conscious Chinese people will eventually hope for and expect their government to don the white hat, and that this fact itself could be coercive?

Tryin' to play the optimist here...

 

Cas Balicki
Joined
Jun '10
Cas Balicki

I don't know that optimism has anything to do with it, Scott. People, be they Asians or Westerner's, may hope all they want for their governments to do something, but they will do nothing to alter that government's course unless they are either 1) a part of that government, or 2) perceive that they can influence their government. At this stage the Tienanmen Square image of the lone man standing in front of a column of tanks would aptly summarize the relations between the Chinese people and the Chinese government. Don't misunderstand me, Scott, I would prefer to be an optimist, but optimism under communist rule, if the 20th century is any example, leads either to the gulag or death. "Let a thousand flowers grow" that they might be easier to mow down.

Severely Ltd.
Joined
Oct '10
Severely Ltd.

Though I have it on good authority that the Chinese can be inscrutable, in this case I'm going to accept it, as Peter seems to, as an honest appreciation of Reagan and view it as a promising sign. It did my heart good to read it, thanks.

Scott Reusser
Joined
May '10
Scott Reusser

 One last attempt to cheer you up, Cas! (probably a futile one since this thread is likely dead).....

Cas Balicki: [...] Don't misunderstand me, Scott, I would prefer to be an optimist, but optimism under communist rule, if the 20th century is any example, leads either to the gulag or death.

I wonder if HSH Hans etc's point about first-free-the-economy is similar to Jeane Kirkpatrick's contention that "right wing" dictatorships are preferable to communist regimes because the transition to democracy in the former is more possible. Might the new China, with its capitalist economy, more resemble one of those Kirkpatrick-preferred regimes, rather than a communist one?

It's been 21 years since Tienanmen Square. Would a similar crackdown be likely today? 5 years from today? I don't think it's a slam-dunk "yes," or at the very least, such a response might be extremely unwise, given a population emboldened by increasing freedom and access to information, however incomplete. 


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading
Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In