[Brett Kier]

"My lesson takeaway:  not quite so high flown.  America represents itself as a democratic--and,  yes, moral--world leader, yet it has backed out of the Paris Climate Agreement.  Does China have the high ground here? What does world leadership look like in the context of climate change?  The videos give us some nice visuals and numbers that could support a lively discussion of what our American moral imperative is in the face of this global crisis."

Irony certainly abounds when an autocratic government possesses the moral high ground on anything, but in this case, I would argue that morality has nothing to do with China’s decision to pursue a "green" agenda. It is a matter of survival. They are drowning in pollution of all kinds, and have realized that they will not survive unless they innovate. The US simply is not there yet. There still remains a great deal of money to be made by financial interests in the energy sector in its current form. But as I have written elsewhere, the next phase of energy production will present its own set of environmental challenges (battery waste disposal for electric cars, et cetera), because energy companies will not pursue truly renewable sources of energy that do not follow a scarcity model of energy production. As far as moral responsibility is concerned, your point is well taken. Indeed the US should lead the way on this score, but the current administration is trying to win re-election by convincing people in Appalachia that clean coal is a viable solution to the future's energy demands.

[Brett Kier]

The BIR is perhaps one of the largest challenges that the US faces as far as its attenuating economic hegemony is concerned. This particular challenge will also present major security concerns for both countries. With China’s economic explosion slowing down in recent years, its next stage of development will be what all countries who have exhausted their current markets seek, namely, to find and exploit new markets. Perhaps this is a foreshadowing of China’s pursuit of a kind of economic imperialism, as all imperial powers were driven by the need for new markets. Problematically, China’s BIR is meeting resistance from the US because it is attempting to create a world-wide Suez Canal, with all of the benefits that control of global trade routes would entail – a kind of hegemony that the US once enjoyed. The delicate negotiations and promises of infrastructure development that China has made internationally have been met with US efforts to quash those agreements through carrots and sticks of their own. The discussion of boundaries and frontiers vis-à-vis the scope of China’s influence and interests is really a balance of power question.

Because we are moving into a multipolar global security framework, competing interests among countries are bound to be characterized by unilateral rather than multilateral agreements, much to the chagrin of the US. It is likely that the US will ultimately be unsuccessful in boxing out China’s BIR plan, in the same way it has been unsuccessful in economically isolating Russia through sanctions and through the use of Kremlinoia propaganda domestically and internationally. The rub may take place in how the US and China define their “core interests”. They may achieve consensus on the GWOT, but human rights groups in the West have been rightly critical of China’s treatment of its Uyghur population. Additionally, one could well conceive of a time, if it has not happened already, where Uyghurs are trained by US proxies to infiltrate Russia – a kind of Operation Gladio redux. The more cynical among us might ask how long it will take those Uyghur re-education camps to become terrorist training camps (some may argue that is already happening by oppressing the Uyghur population – in that way China is following the US script). There is bound to be some stepping on toes as China pursues the BIR, because the US generally sees its frontier extending from its own borders out into adjacent galaxies.

[Brett Kier]

Indeed re: US-China relations. I think the smart money is on maintenance of the status quo: a sometimes competitor and other times adversary (frenemies) relationship. The desire by the China Hawks to escalate conflict with China would result in a self-inflicted wound to be sure – which the US has perfected on an epic level (see Al Qaeda, ISIS, et cetera). The big question seems to be: How far will each side push their hand to achieve a comparative advantage? You are certainly correct to point out that capacity drives agency. If they have the political and economic might, they will want to use it – just as the US has.

[Brett Kier]

China’s current social organization does not seem to support a more equitable distribution of labor within the home (importantly, neither does the US). In many ways, the juxtaposition of China's modern drive towards economic growth and the ever-present traditional cultural practices of Chinese families are at loggerheads. The rise of materialism in China that has been discussed in our lectures is in many ways similar to the unmediated market forces in the US, where the postmodern left upended the status quo, and in the process created a great deal of social unrest (that continues to this day). The old and the new are fighting it out in China as well. But the problem of shadow work persists, as you pointed out; and shadow work is disproportionately and unfairly done mostly by women. One question I have is how feminism is taking shape in China, specifically, which wave of feminism does it more closely resemble? Also, will the shifting gender politics of the country take a turn in the postmodern direction, as it has in the US?

[Brett Kier]

If had to venture a guess, it would appear that there are competing interests at play. China clearly finds financial support from NGOs beneficial, so long as it does not interfere with China's political aims. However, it is well known that Western NGOs are swimming with agent provocateurs (read irony: "Russia meddling in US elections"). Spy games, frenemies, and convenient friendships seem to rule many of the relationships between countries. The Israelis were caught spying inside the US in the biggest spy operation in US history since the Cold War, but the US-Israel relationship is still “stronger than ever”. One way the contradiction you point out makes sense if of the unit of analysis is not the nation-state, but global capital interests, who only have ad hoc loyalty to the countries from which they originated.

[Brett Kier]

China's move towards greater efficiency is a positive development. However, the carbon wars should be understood from a number of perspectives. Besides the often discussed hypothesis of the dangers of carbon by the scientific orthodoxy, it is worth observing that major energy companies are committing themselves to a transition to green energy (however they define this squishy term). If history is to be our guide, we should know that these companies are not moving in this direction out of any form of altruism or civic responsibility, wherein they cede market share, pack up, and go quietly into that good night because Mother Earth simply demands it be allowed to survive. They are positioning themselves to create and control the next generation of technologies that will power the world; and they will seek to create scarcity whenever they can, in order to construct a market that most benefits their interests (OPEC, et cetera). Electric power is no different. Recall the often paraphrased conversation between J.P. Morgan and Tesla, when the latter explained that he had created a freely available energy source that was pollution free, and J.P. Morgan responded by saying that if he could not put a meter on it, it was of no value to him.

[Brett Kier]

Overview

The Contemporary China course has provided a broad overview of all of the key issues surrounding the political, economic, social, and cultural issues facing China, along with their short and long term domestic and foreign policy goals. As a World and US History teacher, the class has given me a much greater field of view of China and its history, with an eye towards providing the same to my students. The collaborative atmosphere of my cohort, and well as the openness of the professor to engage in dialogue about the topics discussed during our online lectures, has allowed me to pull from a diverse source of information to help create in-depth lesson plans far beyond what could have been created if I were attempting to research the information discussed on my own. Thoughts on how the topics covered in each session could be used in the classroom are contained below:

Session 1

1a. Geography/Demography

In World History, we often refer to, and illustrate maps in order to understand the geopolitical realities of a particular country. China and its topography are an excellent example of the predictive power of geography. Maps of China across its history help to explain the Dynastic Period up through its civil war and Cultural Revolution. Moreover, China’s effort to revive the Silk Road via the OBOR initiative could not be understood if not for extensive examination of trade routes. Using color and short narrative timelines, maps can facilitate process of memorization and deeper understanding of the affects that our physical environment have on our daily lives.

Additionally, the study of the physical environment will lend itself to discussions of natural resources, scarcity, and the inevitable shift in birth rates the result. Asking students to make predictions about how a society changes if a population has a greater number of older or younger people is a good starting off point for learning about the demographic changes that are occurring in China, as well as the United States. Examining all of these concepts is best done within a comparative framework (China and Russia, China and the US, etc.), as students are better able to understand elements are history that are compared and contrasted with other narratives they are already familiar with.

1b. The Communist Party and the Hukou (household registration) System

The techniques and effects of central planning within communist governments are most clearly illustrated in this aspect of Chinese history. This a very good starting-off point for an assignment that asks students to address a public policy issue that their community is facing, with careful attention paid to the internal and external affects implementation of a particular policy prescription might have (SWOT analysis); whereupon students would research and report historical examples of the results that communities and governments had with similar efforts.

Sessions 2 & 3

2a. Reform and Opening & 3a. Expanding Choices 

An assignment that engage student in the concept of political and economic opening is asking students to conduct an interview. In particular, students would select someone who travelled from another country to live in the United States, and ask them what life was like in their country of origin, why they left, and how has it changed since they left. These types of questions are almost certain to provide answers related to politics and economics, which would facilitate discussions about how and why societies change over time.

2b. China Shakes the World & 3b. Individual Choices Today

This topic is tailor made for a discussion of cyclical economic modeling (id est, the business cycle) and the nature of fiat currencies and their relationship to production models in a globalist economic framework. The Chinese economic expansion is an apropos case study for seniors to examine when engaging in Socratic Seminars about the domestic and international effects of globalization on a particular society.

Session 4

4a. Generations

This section of the class would fit nicely with the comments made above in the subsection “2a. Reform and Opening & 3a. Expanding Choices”.

4b. Environmental Degradation

This section of the class would fit nicely with the comments made above in the subsection “1a. Geography/Demography”

Session 5

5a. U.S.-China Relations & 5b. Global China

This section of the class was perhaps the most valuable in terms of attempting to examine and explain how China fits into the world that the students are currently experiencing on a daily basis. Both US and World History classes would benefit from lessons related to complexity of the relationship between China and the US. For example, the use of Dueling Mind Maps is useful to suss out the pros and cons of trade between China and the US (from both perspectives):

China’s Mind Map (address the following): How do we benefit from trade with the US? How does trade with the US harm Chinese interests?

US’s Mind Map: How do we benefit from trade with China? How does trade with the China harm US interests?

Discussion Questions: Where do US and Chinese interests overlap? From the perspective of both countries, are there areas of the trade relationship that are equally problematic?

 

 

[Brett Kier]

The real question regarding Chinese hyperinflation is: "Can China maintain the domestic and foreign demand (consumption rates) that is fueling its economy?" The answer to that question is, to some degree, answered by the success of OBOR, as well as the growing domestic consumer debt bubble. You concern about the lack of safeguards is well-founded. On some level, it is hard to see the creation of the consumer debt bubble as anything other than intentional, unless they are just trying to play musical chairs until the music stops and hope that the crash will not be catastrophic. Pro-cyclical economic policies always benefit someone. A good question to ask is cui bono? And if we can answer that question we may find out who is pushing this economic policy. Although, as "they" often say, never attribute to careful planning what can be attributed to incompetence. A good article discussing the hyperinflation phenomenon can be found here:

https://seekingalpha.com/article/724301-29-hyperinflations-in-the-last-100-years-is-the-biggest-one-coming

It is safe to say that there are some China Hawks in the West that would like to facilitate such a hyperinflationary event, but this could have disastrous consequences for the global economy, not just China.

Regarding FANG and US intelligence, mainstream news outlets have been covering this relationship for a number of years (DARPA's creation of the internet has even been fictionalized in television series' like The Americans). Three examples of mainstream news sources that have written extensively on this subject include the New York Times, The Washington Post, and The Intercept (more recently). The Snowden leaks were also a watershed moment for the release of information linking FANG with the US intelligence establishment.

[Brett Kier]

Prologue

We have for some time now, been in the midst of a reshuffling of the geopolitical map. With the US dollar and military might losing their hegemonic status (at least the former), the geopolitical landscape is moving towards a multipolar framework. China’s rise and challenge to the US is evidence of this change. This transition has been happening beneath the cacophony and rhetoric about violations of international norms, or the upending of the liberal international order. It has been observed in the fight for control of shipping lanes and trade routes, trade partnerships, special drawing rights, and corporate espionage. There has been a quiet war going on for decades, and the US appears to be losing ground. However, whether China can maintain its gains under the weight of its own fragile growth remains to be seen. As a practical matter, protecting the liberal international order (LIO) means protecting the supremacy of the dollar and wherever possible, the projection of US soft power through the threat of US hard power. Many China hawks in the US may be sitting on the sidelines with glee, as China’s consumer debt skyrockets, to take advantage of the imminent bursting of the bubble. If would be worth considering if the US is in fact facilitating this process along with something akin to the Cloward-Piven Strategy.

How Xi Jinping Sees the World…and Why?

Jinping’s hostility to the liberal International order (LIO) should be understood in similar ways to Putin’s antagonism towards it. Namely, a great deal of diplomatic, military, and covert warfare was undertaken (which continues today) to create the LIO under US leadership, to the detriment of China, and more so to Russia.

China’s newfound position within the LIO is primarily due to its military buildup and resulting ability to project hard power, which has been fueled by its economic growth. Additionally, its foreign policy is driven by domestic policy considerations (Geopolitics 101).

Leaving behind the “century of humiliation” and towards the “Chinese Dream” of being a respected player on the international stage, and creating national harmony within the country (id est, Uygur re-education camps), has meant developing its military and economic capacity, and letting loose its domestic consumer power.

Xi Jinping is using an all of the above approach to leadership, aka, “hybrid approach”.

1. Maintenance of membership in international institutions
2. Articulating the interdependence of Chinese and US success within an  international community
3. Projecting its power and influence into East and Central Asia, becoming a regional power

Bader views China as seeking regional dominance, positioning itself as a leader within Asia, and a strong number 1 or 2 economically (see OBOR); but also seeking to project its hard power beyond its immediate regional concerns. It is worth noting here that China’s rise was to some degree facilitated by the Nixon Shock of 1971, which caused Nixon to famously declare to his colleagues, “We’re all Keynesians now”, helped to export huge sums of US fiat currency into the international system, acting as an escape hatch for all that US inflation, and in the process made China the manufacturing engine of the US, so the latter could go on a consumer spending spree that only slowed down in 2007-8 (read, hit a brick wall). The only problem was, the US, and perhaps in the future China, ignored the problem of the Triffin Dilemma.

The policy goals China is pursuing, the author observes, are more a factor of its history and newfound capacity, rather than its current leader. Some of the author’s observations amount to Barnum statements, in that he essentially points out that China is forging a path and pursuing a strategy that all countries follow: Namely, China seeks to maximize their influence and capacity within an anarchic system, bend rules when they can, break rules when they think they must, and by all means cheat – but don’t get caught doing it.

The author’s criticism of China’s lack of adherence to certain international norms is particularly rich. Take human rights for example. Bader is speaking within the framework of the West’s commitment to human rights, and its global leadership in defending said rights, especially when the West sees other countries (aka, bad actors, regimes, et cetera) not behaving. It can fairly be pointed out that China is violating moral and ethical principles by its treatment of Uygurs, but the question of norms becomes very sticky, and conversations on this topic, regardless of the participants, are always had inside of a vast cathedral made of glass: The Trail of Tears, Japanese Internment, Guantanamo, extraordinary rendition, “non-combatants”, Boer concentration camps, the Irish Potato Famine, the list goes on…. It remains a necessary challenge to call out evil when it is observed (and prevent and stop it if possible), but it cannot be pretended that anyone’s hands are clean.

Bader points to the crux of issue, which all the authors below seem to echo). That is, everything boils down to hard power: Will China exercise it in order to reach its goals? Becoming a revisionist power, as Bader puts it, is defined solely by the use of force as an offensive policy tool, rather than a defensive method of survival.

The China Reckoning: How Beijing Defied American Expectations

In a nutshell: China just will not do what America wants. “Since the early years of this century, however, China's economic liberalization has stalled.” This is diplospeak for, “China is not allowing US businesses to own or control significant swaths of Chinese land or infrastructure, through the ‘free market’, id est, China is being protectionist and we don’t like it.” Many of the criticisms are fair regarding China, but the authors seem to offer a one-dimensional view, unlike Bader, of the nature and motivation of China’s actions.

There is a great deal of irony in the authors criticisms. China’s surveillance control grid is an apropos example. Western control grids are far more subtle, but are nonetheless just as ubiquitous. The surveillance capability that China has is also wielded by the West, albeit in a more discreet way (no thanks to Snowden). The primary difference is that much of the technology sed in the West to spy on people was developed within private corporations with overt and covert funding streams. Further, the authors point out that, “A number of nondemocratic governments - in Sudan, Syria, Venezuela, Zimbabwe, and elsewhere-have benefited from such obstruction [by the Chinese].” Boloney sandwich needs to be called here. The leaders of Syria and Venezuela were duly elected; and the US is backing its choice for president of Venezuela, despite the fact that he has never been elected to anything.

The authors conclude by suggesting the US exercise “a new degree of humility about” its “ability to change China.” Agreed, but that virtue is not something for which the US is generally known – quite the opposite in fact. “Washington should instead focus more on its own power and behavior, and the power and behavior of its allies and partners. Basing policy on a more realistic set of assumptions about China would better advance U.S. interests and put the bilateral relationship on a more sustainable footing.” I would like to interpret this policy prescription as focusing on domestic matters, like why Flint stills drinks and bathes in poison; and how China will help its people breath clean air and drink clean water.

The Coming Chinese Crackup

Shambaugh asserts that authoritarian rule by Xi Jinping will ultimately have the effect of destabilizing China, primarily because he views the strategies employed by the CCP as unsustainable, and points to the Jiang and Hu administrations as being exemplars of how reform should take place – more democratization and openness, rather than Xi’s autocratic approach. One x-factor in the survival of China’s communist party is technology. How will AI shape the control mechanisms that are being established? Will it prolong their rule, or somehow revolutionize the Chinese consciousness?

To paraphrase, Shambaugh effectively highlights all the reasons that China may collapse under the weight of its own progress: central planning (and the corruption that inevitably accompanies it). However, what is particularly noteworthy about this piece is that it characterizes regime change operations that routinely occur within China and elsewhere, at the hands of Western intelligence agencies, as a conspiratorial view (id est, unfounded and preposterous). Suggesting that China will collapse without some nudging from outside the country is disingenuous.

Did America Get China Wrong?

Perhaps the most even-handed of the policy prescriptions among the authors reviewed here, Wang Jisi simply says, may the best system win. Let China do its thing domestically, unless it acts in a militarily unilateral way that is not defensive, and see if it is as successful as the US at providing for and garnering its citizens loyalty and approval.

Commentary

The real fear lies not in the histrionics of pundits asserting that Trump is upending the liberal international order (because it finished the game with the most gold after WWII and got to make the rules, id est Bretton Woods); it is the fact that a rising multipolar world has been ascendant since at least 2007-8. US dollar hegemony is no longer assured. All those tanks and guns that follow US dollars around the world are no longer as effective as they once were in protecting the liberal international order (see Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria).

This is a good entry point to discuss the Heartland Theory to students, and what role the Washington consensus should play in shaping the liberal international order it created at the end of WWII. In particular, this is a good opportunity to learn the basics of international relations theory, at least as it relates to all countries seizing opportunities to expand their influence, and what constitutes a casus belli? The Us-China relationship offers teachers an enormous amount of perspectives from which to examine the current historical moment, and the role the US can and should play in it.

[Brett Kier]

This would be a good entry point for a multicultural analysis of attitudes across Asia and the West broadly, comparing and contrasting opinion polls on things like desire for children, marriage, higher education aspirations, et cetera. Perhaps a fishbowl activity might be effective as a warmup using this data.

[Brett Kier]

How the environmental crisis facing China is addressed by its people and its leadership in many ways has been an example for the US to follow. However, the following presuppositions about the environmental crisis facing China (and the world) need to be addressed by teachers at some point, and dealt with in a serious way. In particular, the following questions need to be discussed by students:

1. Why, if temperature increases drive increases in carbon dioxide, does the media discourse on the issue of sustainability pretend the opposite is true (id est, X -> Y, rather than Y -> X)? See the following documentary for an outline of these well documented scientific observations.
2. Why does the discussion of environmental sustainability (and alternative sources of energy) completely ignore vast swaths of scientific knowledge that could improve the quality of the air and water globally?
3. Why do we constantly conflate carbon dioxide with pollution, when they are fact separate but correlated phenomenon?

There is a serious issue concerning intellectual honesty on our part when we engage in the framing of false dichotomies for students, ex gratia, if it is not solar, electric, or wind powered, it has no place in a technologically advanced society – or that those are the only solutions available to us, which if pursued too quickly will upend the global economy.  Students should be given an opportunity to understand that those in power will always seek to create scarcity (real or imagined), in order to maintain the status quo. With all the talk of saving the planet by not having children or riding bikes instead of driving cars, we make no mention of plummeting birth rates worldwide, or the real danger that bioengineering (cloud seeding, et cetera) poses to the environment. Additionally, major inefficiencies within the free market need to be highlighted to students regarding the environmental movement and sustainability generally. Topics for consideration include:

Planned Obsolescence – see the documentary The Lightbulb Conspiracy (good for econ classes as well)

Hydrogen Fuel Technology (Brown’s Gas, HHO) – machinery that is currently in existence that runs on water (technology that can be used to create vehicles that run on water); this technology is seeing wider use in China than in the US

GEET Fuel Processors – retrofitted to existing gas powered motors, a technology that can nearly eliminate particulate matter (pollution) release from internal combustion engines (built in the 1980s); which can also be used in waste disposal plants to the same level of effectiveness

Electro-magnetic motors – shown in the laboratory to be as much as 300% efficient (see De Palma’s N-Machine), and pollution free

[Brett Kier]

The result of the infiltration of western culture into China post 1978 has been mixed. There seems to be a complex set of interests attempting to shape the narrative of what China is, and will become. There are great efforts underway to direct the flow of the cultural awakening of the Chinese people (from inside and outside the country) into activities that will ultimately distract and amuse, id est, bread and circus (as the song goes: “What does the billboard say? Come and play. Come and play. Forget about the movement”). There are reasons to remain optimistic, however. Environmental protests seem to evidence an exercise of real liberty – but protestor’s faces are collected and stored, only to be put under constant surveillance. Also, the appearance of NIMBY’s is a sure sign of a rising middle class and the continued development of social consciousness among the Chinese people. During Jinping’s era, we have witnessed a reversal from the energy of the student movements of the late 1980’s, and the investment and development of technology will only be used to create ever more intricate systems of social control. The state panopticon’s  Jingjing and Chacha are apt examples.

For students in the classroom, China can serve as a good case study in the westernization and liberalization of societies, and how popular culture can either contribute to, or degrade the health of a society. Social health indicators could be introduced to see if students would be able to draw any conclusions about cause and effect: teen pregnancy rates, marriage and divorce rates, domestic violence rates, et cetera. Parenthetically, the Tiananmen Square protests receive a lot of attention in 10th Grade World History. In the past, I have introduced primary source documents to explore the nature of the protests in an effort to encourage students to develop their historical imagination, and think carefully about how historical events are recollected, written about, and studied by future students. The document below may add value to your lesson plans when covering this subject.

https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/b8b6dc_f87d9a19209c4660afb8782194f60080.pdf

[Brett Kier]

Important details regarding HSBC wrongdoing in the U.S. vs HSBC BANK USA, N.A. Statement of Facts.

[Brett Kier]

Schumpeter is alive and well in China. Modernization – read westernization – is by its very nature is akin to the World Engine in the blockbuster film Man of Steele. It will remake anything it touches into a perfect commodified unit of desire. This also puts me in mind of Russia's cultural renaissance with the Eastern Orthodox Church over the past decade. Once the cultural Marxism had rotted on the vine and revealed itself for what it was (authoritarianism), one began to see the religious revival of Russia's heritage once again begin to flourish. Unfortunately, as I write, I must admit that both China and Russia still have quite the love affair with authoritarianism, but there seems to be an effort made to preserve their respective cultural artifacts. Curiously, Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) survived all of the cultural revolutions within China. Food for thought.

 

[Brett Kier]

Ms. Schechter,

Very interesting take on the labor question (thank you for the background info on your previous life). Perhaps another angle for students to tackle is the question of the pros and cons of a UBI (universal basic income), given the fear that many unskilled workers in China (as well as in the US) could lose their jobs to mechanization (robotics and the like).

[Author]

Posts