« Berlin memories | Main | Measuring the movie critics »
China claim of the day
If China remains culturally closed, the Chinese Century will never come to pass. Instead, the United States--a country that has struggled with race and racism for centuries, and in the process has become more culturally open and resilient--will dominate this century as it did the last.
That's from Reihan Salaam, who discusses how far the problem of Asian racism is from being solved.
Posted by Tyler Cowen on November 9, 2009 at 07:34 AM in Political Science | Permalink
Comments
Not surprised, being an Asian myself.
Posted by: Mike at Nov 9, 2009 8:30:29 AM
There are so many chinese, that even if mass immigration is allowed, it won't change much the fabric of their society, as it has happened in the west.
Posted by: ettore pauma at Nov 9, 2009 8:47:19 AM
I think the article is too narrowly focused on racism as a dividing line limiting growth and international integration.. Nationalism is also a dividing line which makes it difficult for countries to integrate and grow. "We are Number 1" chants by the US has diminished our influence around the world, even if we are making improvements in racial integration.
As to South Korea being impeded by an aging population, its problem will be solved by the collapse of North Korea and the difficulty of assimilating this third world population.
Culture has a greater influence, and American culture is still something that is more influential in affecting social structure and corporate governance abroad. But, it can only go so far, and, in countries where religion is the organizing principal, it may actually spur a counter revolution.
Posted by: Bill at Nov 9, 2009 9:16:35 AM
The article misses the large costs of Glorious Multiculturalism: a racial spoils system, harmful quotas, and lower social trust.
Posted by: athelas at Nov 9, 2009 10:24:49 AM
Someone should ask Reihan if he thinks China would be better off if it had instituted race-based chattel slavery in the 17th century.
Posted by: TGGP at Nov 9, 2009 10:55:06 AM
If those Mongol hordes had never faced their racism, and had not culturally opened to the rest of the world, that Mongol century would never had happened.
The British Raj was of course also based on the great respect the Brits had for the Indians.
And only after the US opened itself culturally to native American values did it become a continental power.
They learned this cultural openness from the Spanish, who ruled the rest of the American continent through cultural resilience. If the Spanish had tried to impose Catholicism on their subjects, it would never have worked.
More serious: people call this the American century because the rest of the world adapts much harder to American norms, including a relative openness to other races, than the US does to theirs. If, big if, there is a Chinese century, it would mean pretty much be definition that the rest of the world adapts to Chinese norms. Racism might simply be back in vogue.
Posted by: Zamfir at Nov 9, 2009 10:55:58 AM
I'm often sickened by politically correct culture, but it's vastly preferable to the in-your-face racism that exists in regions where political correctness has yet to catch on (which is most of the world). I highly recommend it as a "solution".
Posted by: C at Nov 9, 2009 10:56:24 AM
It should be the goal of humanity to get past the idea of one country "owning" a century.
Nationalism and fake inter-country "competitions" have been responsible for enough pain and misery (and some good, too).
Time for everyone to grow up.
Posted by: mk at Nov 9, 2009 11:01:30 AM
Well said, mk.
Posted by: C at Nov 9, 2009 11:38:23 AM
Zamfir, why do you think that there will be a Chinese century? Chinese empires have always been very isolationist--they never expanded much beyong their borders, and their sphere of cultural influence has also been limited to small neighboring countries. Why should this change now, after a history of many thousands of years?
Posted by: anon at Nov 9, 2009 12:37:14 PM
Bill:
As to South Korea being impeded by an aging population, its problem will be solved by the collapse of North Korea and the difficulty of assimilating this third world population.
Really? 'solved?' Not 'eclipsed', instead?
Posted by: MattJ at Nov 9, 2009 1:47:21 PM
Germans were unable to integrate the East up to this day. And DDR was much closer to BRD in terms of culture and daily life than NKorea is to SKorea. Hell, the Kims even made some progress in alienating the language of NK from standard Korean.
Once the 16 million starving people with zero business skills make a stampede to Seoul, you will see serious problems. The only thing that may help is that the NKoreans are disciplined to high obedience of authorities, so they will not cause a wave of violent crime.
Posted by: Marian Kechlibar at Nov 9, 2009 2:09:45 PM
C:
Political correctness is not a "solution" to racism. PC is racist itself; just "reverse racism" by giving some (but not all) historically disadvantaged groups a legal leg-up.
MLK Jr. got it right when he dreamed that men would one day be judged by the content of their character. PC is "judge not", even when someone believes something violently anti-social. MLK says "judge on the merits." That is the solution.
Posted by: Brock at Nov 9, 2009 3:35:36 PM
Brock:
I don't consider PCness a solution, which is why I put "solution" in quotes. If we can ever get to judging people on their merits, I'm all for it. But if I have to pick from existing alternatives, I'll go for PC culture every time. It's mostly a show and it creates its own problems, but it's so much more pleasant.
Posted by: C at Nov 9, 2009 4:09:42 PM
Yes, this will definitely be The American Century, as long as the Chinese continue for the next 90 years doing what they did for the last 9: lend us vast amounts of money with which we, in turn, demonstrate our more enlightened racial attitudes by lending to California minority homebuyers to default upon.
Anybody want to bet the Chinese will keep this up for the rest of the century?
Posted by: Steve Sailer at Nov 9, 2009 4:38:38 PM
Reihan discusses how the aging process reduces the effectiveness of the human capital that comprises a given society, but he fails to consider that the quality of human capital varies between regions of the world. He also fails to consider approaches other than immigration to deal with the aging problem. One alternative approach, which the Japanese are pursuing is increased robotics and automation. Another innovative solution, which has been proposed by a certain Englishman that I know, is to use bio-engineering to directly attack the problem of the aging process itself. Both of these offer a superior approach instead of mass immigration by low-skill immigrants.
Sometimes the best approach to problem solving is to think outside the box.
Posted by: kurt9 at Nov 9, 2009 6:11:58 PM
One big problem for the Chinese, or any east Asian country, is that an influx of white men into their societies will coincide with a massive increase in sexual competition from, mostly, white men. Most "racism" is nothing more than male sexual competition, ala the type described by Gunnar Myrdal's study of segregation and Jim Crow in the American South, where such social structures existed for the sole reason of keeping black men from having sex with white women.
Posted by: Asher at Nov 9, 2009 8:06:03 PM
Perhaps economists could come up with a basket of great books from the West(excluding the bible) and great books from the East, and compare their sales totals in foreign civilizations. Then we would have a test of Reihan's hypothesis.
Posted by: P at Nov 9, 2009 11:36:28 PM
I don't buy the claims about "historical isolationism" of China as a guide to the future. Chinese empires dominated their region militarily/politically to the extent to which they could, given the economic and technological constraints. This manifested most spectacularly when 18th century Qing destroyed/subjugated the then-existing Mongol state in the steppes (incidentally, causing many of them to flee to settle in Russia). Xinjiang got taken over even earlier than that, a no mean accomplishment given contemporary transportation methods. That is - when the Chinese were weak, they stayed behind the Wall; when they got the good cavalry and steppe troops under the Manchus, they marched into the steppe and wrecked havoc. This may all look boring and low key from big Western distance, but to the people around them (Mongols, Tibetans, Turks, Vietnamese in some cases) Chinese expansion was no joke.
Why do I bring this up? Because economic and technological factors now make a much bigger area potentially amenable for Chinese expansion/domination or even outright conquest. They didn't have navy then, but they do now (or maybe will, soon enough). Their military couldn't match Western or Japanese militaries then, well, not for much longer. And so on. That's not to say that they cannot be contained, but the potential threat is certainly there, regardless of all those stories about isolationism.
Posted by: easy to be isolationist without good navy at Nov 9, 2009 11:48:35 PM
