Join the community!

Login, register or Connect to comment.

Columns & Analysis

China's dual personality will affect future of world

Published on Monday, Jul 20, 2009 at 12:12 am | Last updated on Friday, Jul 17, 2009 at 10:10 am 2 Comments

GUIYANG, China — Before planning for and making the trans-global trek to the most populous country on Earth, I knew mainland China mostly through television and movie screens. My sinologists were Bruce Lee, Jackie Chan and Egg Shen, the crotchety shaman from "Big Trouble in Little China" — a Cabinet of advisers who left me, ahem, unprepared for my voyage east.

Thus, I was thrilled when, upon arriving here, a Peace Corps volunteer handed me a 1997 tome called "Red China Blues." Written by Chinese-Canadian journalist Jan Wong, the book tours a nation on the verge of superpowerdom, and it ends by suggesting the country's industrialization may mean "the future of China may be the West's past."

One excursion does not make me a China guru, but I can report with some confidence that when it comes to economic growth, Wong is right. China is walking in our shoes — and that's not necessarily a good thing.

On my trip (which you can read more about at Openleft.com), I've seen America circa 1900: coastal metropolises of towering wealth hemming in a polluted and destitute heartland. Two Chinas, as John Edwards might say — one you constantly hear about and another hidden from view.

In Hong Kong, I gaped at the sleek office towers, fine restaurants and nouveau riche — the "miracle" endlessly celebrated by The New York Times' Tom Friedman (China is a place of "wide avenues, skyscrapers, green spaces, software parks and universities"), Newsweek's Fareed Zakaria ("China's growth has obvious and amazing benefits for the world") and most of America's Very Serious Commentators. Indeed, according to MIT's Yasheng Huang, China's best-known cities are known for tricking incurious observers into portraying the entire country as "sanitary ... largely free of grotesque manifestations of poverty (and) one of the most successful countries in tackling income inequality."

Of course, in Guiyang, a coal-mining town of 3 million in China's poorest province, I found exactly the opposite — the darker side of the "miracle."

Here in the countryside is the soundstage of a post-apocalyptic sci-fi flick — filth-covered tenements slapped together with crumbling cement and kitchen tile; limbless paupers with burned faces begging for food; an atmosphere choked by soot, exhaust and the stench of human excrement.

Scholars insist this is the unavoidable consequence of a country being run by the Chinese Communist Party — an extreme version of the Republican Party that couples Genghis Khan's intolerance with Hank Paulson's authoritarian capitalism. Pundits assert that China's inequality, which according to World Bank data now rivals our own Gilded Age, is just a necessary evil — the obligatory pitfall of nonetheless positive Western-style development. And while some Americans may lament international poverty, many are too distracted or unsympathetic to care about seemingly far-flung tragedies.

But, then, the challenges China poses aren't about Save-the-Children altruism, and they aren't distant triflings. As none other than "Big Trouble in Little China" presciently warned, China is here — and we cannot simply cite inevitability as reason to ignore its metastasizing problems.

We're not talking about the United States in 1900 — a country of only 76 million people pigheadedly despoiling its way into the 20th century. It's 2009, the planet's already on the brink of resource exhaustion and climate catastrophe, and China is 17 times more populous than America during our industrial era. If we just sit back and listen to those who pooh-pooh "necessary evils" and celebrate supposed "miracles"; if governments refuse to strengthen international environmental policies; if the world merely hopes for the best as 1.3 billion Chinese pursue old-school smokestack industrialization, then there's not going to be much of a world left.

Our future won't be that gleaming Hong Kong skyline we keep being told about — it will be downtown Guiyang.

David Sirota is a syndicated columnist and author. Find his blog at OpenLeft.com or e-mail him at ds@davidsirota.com.

In order to make comments, you must verify your account.

In order to comment on SunJournal.com, you must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your profile. A member of our staff will call you to verify this information. To join in, fill out your user profile completely and check the box "please verify my status." We'll get back to you within one business day to verify your account.

Login or create an account here.

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned.

Advertisement

Displaying comments, from newest to oldest

Big Love's picture

I'd say major in Mandarin,

I'd say major in Mandarin, Mad Dad, and minor in Spanish... I always thought of the Communist party as more closely resembling the American Democratic Party than the Repubs. I guess the grass always looks redder on the other side.Big Love

mad dad's picture

The Communist Party an

The Communist Party an extreme version of the Republican Party, that's a stretch. Only a twisted mind could come up with something like that. One thing about China to think about is that they keep buying up our countries debt. We had better think about trying to get out of debt instead of going further down the tubes. Between being energy dependent on the Middle East and financially dependent on China, I don't know whether to take language classes in Arabic or Chinese. I surely want to be able to communicate with whichever country takes us over. I have to agree with that guy Pickens who thinks we can become financially independent by developing our ouw sources of power through wind farms and natural gas. Some people say he is just talking to promote these item for personal gain. Perhaps so, but by the same token who has a better idea?

Advertisement

Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...