How China’s recent moves on technology may not be Marxist at all- and instead shows them being very, very smart about the dangers of social media. This essay was written in response to the Quillette Article America the Indispensable
It never ceases to amaze me, the extent to which Western observers get China wrong. West and East have many differences. What can appear quite reasonable to one culture, can seem aggressive and bellicose to the other. Key to understanding China and the CCP is understanding their twin obsessions. They have an abiding fear of instability and are paranoid about dissatisfaction amongst their people. It’s why they run so many surveys to judge satisfaction levels in local populations- even with things as mundane as municipal waste collection. The instability fear is bone deep, rooted in the collective sufferings of their people in the past, the paranoia about their people justified by the recent speed with which views amongst the population shifted on the subject of air pollution and particulate matter leaving the Chinese Government deeply shaken. It seemed to come from nowhere.
So, in this light, it is perhaps easier to understand what explains their recent shift in economic thinking. This article from the BBC does a reasonable job of summarising the main points of the policy change. The move on private education is predictable. We’ve seen something similar before in Hong Kong. Beijing does not like many of the Western narratives contained in modern educational curricula and is particularly hostile to recent Western ideas about gender and LGBT awareness aimed at children. In many ways, this is a concern for what they see as the degeneration of the West potentially spreading to China.
They have a phrase, baizuo, which means white left or white liberals and refers to those whose political opinions are perceived as being guided by emotions or a hypocritical show of selflessness and empathy- especially in areas such as race, gender and climate alarmism. Unlike many in the West, they have read the IPCC reports from a scientific perspective and now ignore the worst case predictions, knowing full well that it is unlikely we will see a return to coal-driven cars. They see climate change as a serious long-term problem, one of many global issues and one on which we are well on our way to fixing.
More broadly, the talk of monopolies and “foreign-related rule of law” is a stick. It threatens reprisals for what they see as the movement in the West, and particularly America, towards an anti-China stance on trade. But underneath the veneer and the diplomatic chess over trade, the real substance relates to their move on technology. This is not a return to Marxism or an end to Chinese capitalism- it is simply that they are the first amongst the advanced economies to grasp in an imminent and prevailing truth- social media is destroying every country in which it has a significant presence.
Let me say that again, with emphasis- this is not hyperbole- social media is destroying every country in which it has a significant presence. The temptation is to think that American chaos is an outlier. That the Cultural Cold Civil War is a feature of America’s increasingly partisan landscape or to believe that Trump was a function of dissatisfaction over shifting demographics. This is wrong, he was a symptom of the ways in which social media can stoke underlying grievance at the failure to address the economic woes of entire regions of the country into vandal fury, intent upon tearing down establishment politics. America is not an outlier- social media is creating instability in every Western country it is present in. America is simply the country which has been most destabilised, so far.
To be fair it’s not just social media. The abandonment of the Fairness Doctrine, paired with a legacy media intent on monetising outrage, or anger economics has a great deal to do with it. Matt Taibbi has written a fascinating book on the subject:
But what legacy media thrives upon- disdain and mutual loathing- social media turns into riots and insurrections. You may think I am wrong, that these events point to underlying tensions, but why then did several YouTube accounts make hundreds of thousands of dollars in 2013 by showing nothing but repeating Police Brutality cases? A recent survey shows that of those who identify as very liberal, 22% believed that cases of police shootings of unarmed Black men in 2019 were at 10,000 or above. The actual figure was 13. Meanwhile although only 4% of Trump supporters really believe that Democratic elites eat babies or drink their blood, up to 31% are willing to express as much out of a misguided sense of tribal loyalty. But still, the fact that anyone believes it at all, should be cause for concern.
In order to drive engagement and keep people focused on their social media accounts, by far the best way is negative engagement and within this band width nothing attracts eyeballs better than outrage at the latest verbal atrocity committed by the political opposition. Many have attributed the recent fall-off of sports viewership in areas like football or basketball to support for BLM related issues promoted by advertisers and the like, but it certainly wasn’t enough to drive the British away from their beloved game in Euro 2021.
The truth was Americans were all too busy watching YouTube through their FB, tweeting their outrage or composing long rants on Reddit about the inequities of the world. Sports is only a figurative war, light entertainment- why settle for the substitute when outrage at the opposition can get the adrenal glands oozing, the heart thumping and the rage building. Or did you really think the record voter turnout in 2020 was only about Donald Trump? We’ve long known there is direct correlation between high voter turnout and pending political collapse.
So the Chinese are quite right to fear the effects of social media, in political terms, because in a One Party State there are only two ways resentment and dissatisfaction driven by social media can turn- inward or outward. And whilst its very much in their interest to stoke a little anti-Western sentiment, because it consolidates their position- casting the Chinese State as the noble defender of the Chinese people, the last thing they want or need is social media causing the proverbial runaway train of population-based outrage at the latest Western slight to Chinese dignity. Imagine, for example, China’s economy took a downturn and the Chinese population blamed the West’s hostile trade policies. What would China do if, because of social media, 90% of their population demanded immediate war with America?
But there is another reason for China to crackdown on technology and social media, it is making their young people just as miserable as ours. In recent years, Jonathan Haidt & Nick Allen have documented the adverse effect of digital technology on mental health . Only in July, Jonathan Haidt and Jean Twenge published the results of research conducted in 37 countries showing that smartphone and internet access were responsible for much higher levels of adolescent loneliness . And it’s not a problem confined to the very young, recent social media trends in China have contributed to rising levels of dissatisfaction amongst Chinese millennials and the trend of ‘lying flat’ on the job.
Remember, this generation is amongst those who will be called to confront China’s pending population crisis, the 421 problem, where one working son or daughter will be asked to help take care of two retired parents and four grandparents. It is perhaps not an encouraging sign that a generation which enjoys a lifestyle and spending habits which their parents could only dream about feels somewhat disdainful of having to go to work and deigning to participate in the workforce.
So perhaps by making moves on social media, the Chinese are not being anti-capitalist or Marxist in their analysis, perhaps they are simply being a lot smarter than we are. Key to understanding how to reform social media is restricting access to what I will call the ‘envy window’. Research has identified that one of the main drivers of the anxiety and depression experienced by teenage girls is caused by ‘fear of losing out’, the worry about not being invited to the next social gathering, or missing out on the latest peer group. Juxtaposed with this is the negative body image associated with seeing all your friends filter their faces and bodies through apps that make them appear more perfect- a marked contrast to the reflection in the mirror.
In the consumer sense, restricting this ‘envy window’ would entail showing friendly staff at a luxurious hotel or spa, but not customers- especially not those cut from the familiar cloth of perfection for the target demo. Existing models for clothes might have to have their features converted to those of a mannequin or anime representation of self, to prevent the angst which arises from unfavourable comparisons.
In interpersonal communications it would be wise for the Chinese State to watch for those trends which replicate and resonate, lead to fixation or obsession, and generally contributing towards a feeling of malaise and discontent. Here in the West, we don’t have the institutional mandate to enforce such state restrictions and this is one rare instance where I am not sure whether this should elicit relief or regret. China is right to worry about the harms and potential dangers to society of social media. From 2030 onwards, I predict the chances of social media collapsing any Western advanced economy in which it is popular at between 2% and 5% per decade, slowly rising to 10% by 2050. When Emmanuel Macron stepped into the Culture War, I doubt he realised just how much of the denigration of French culture was driven by the negative social feedback which social media weaponizes.
No doubt social media and MSM are fomenting and profiting from social decay. Who else? The intellectual commie clericy. The globalist plutocrats. BLM/Antifa. Young idealists who always enjoy turning the world upside down and/or burning it down. The ball-less 'patriarchy'. Who else? There's not just one nexus of evil here, it's a collaboration.
Interesting article. I am not much of abuser of social media but the bit I do on LinkedIn and Instagram are a window into the potential for sickness of many forms. The Chinese are more pragmatic than ideological at this point and seem desperately to be trying to maintain control for the long term. Not sure it can be done but they mean to do it.
Not sure I buy your reasoning for the drop in Olympic viewership. Certainly some of that may be possible but many of the young are both on social media and avid sports fans. I can say that the fatigue with all things woke is palpable here. I didn’t watch much for that reason. Just sick of being preached at. Rooting against the home team is telling.
So there are only two ways to deal with social media? I mean control all by the state or leave it hyperventilating and well censored by the chosen few? Strangely enough these are not so far away from each other. The only difference may be that our elites are delusional which you can see in Davos visitors talking about policies that are outright destructive to their societies. They use the same methods as Chinese do: ostracizing the doubters and if that does not help there are other measures up till prisons for them too (see Australia camps for the Covids or see Germany with their brutality of the police force when one wants to use its constitutional right to protest aganist the gov. or anywhere in the west for a forced medical procedures (this one seems to be recurring theme in the West - last time it was forced sterilization, abandoned in late 60ties I believe).
It is of course not possible just to let the social media do what they do. We have seen riots incited by messages of rape etc (in India), we have also seen wild parties due to badly framed invitations on FB. So clearly some policing is necessary. But what we have now in the west is massive debilitating propaganda combined with livelihood threatening twitter mobs etc. while at the same time heavy handed censorship of almost all dissent is also there. The solution are out there I guess. One may wonder if forums like FB or Twitter that are used by some many people and organisations should not be considered public space and protected from censorship while at the same time certain rules enforced to avoid big trouble? Are there not ways to deal with this in civilized matter i.e. w/ censorship ? Some intelligent moderating (slashdot.org used a good system) would go a long way to keep emotions down. Surely there are other things we can do without censorship and activists billionaires telling me what to do through my gov. that they bought.
Geary - completely off-topic, but do you know what has happened at Quillette? Have they removed all reader comments, and the possibility to comment? Did they announce a change in policy?
No doubt social media and MSM are fomenting and profiting from social decay. Who else? The intellectual commie clericy. The globalist plutocrats. BLM/Antifa. Young idealists who always enjoy turning the world upside down and/or burning it down. The ball-less 'patriarchy'. Who else? There's not just one nexus of evil here, it's a collaboration.
Interesting article. I am not much of abuser of social media but the bit I do on LinkedIn and Instagram are a window into the potential for sickness of many forms. The Chinese are more pragmatic than ideological at this point and seem desperately to be trying to maintain control for the long term. Not sure it can be done but they mean to do it.
Not sure I buy your reasoning for the drop in Olympic viewership. Certainly some of that may be possible but many of the young are both on social media and avid sports fans. I can say that the fatigue with all things woke is palpable here. I didn’t watch much for that reason. Just sick of being preached at. Rooting against the home team is telling.
So there are only two ways to deal with social media? I mean control all by the state or leave it hyperventilating and well censored by the chosen few? Strangely enough these are not so far away from each other. The only difference may be that our elites are delusional which you can see in Davos visitors talking about policies that are outright destructive to their societies. They use the same methods as Chinese do: ostracizing the doubters and if that does not help there are other measures up till prisons for them too (see Australia camps for the Covids or see Germany with their brutality of the police force when one wants to use its constitutional right to protest aganist the gov. or anywhere in the west for a forced medical procedures (this one seems to be recurring theme in the West - last time it was forced sterilization, abandoned in late 60ties I believe).
It is of course not possible just to let the social media do what they do. We have seen riots incited by messages of rape etc (in India), we have also seen wild parties due to badly framed invitations on FB. So clearly some policing is necessary. But what we have now in the west is massive debilitating propaganda combined with livelihood threatening twitter mobs etc. while at the same time heavy handed censorship of almost all dissent is also there. The solution are out there I guess. One may wonder if forums like FB or Twitter that are used by some many people and organisations should not be considered public space and protected from censorship while at the same time certain rules enforced to avoid big trouble? Are there not ways to deal with this in civilized matter i.e. w/ censorship ? Some intelligent moderating (slashdot.org used a good system) would go a long way to keep emotions down. Surely there are other things we can do without censorship and activists billionaires telling me what to do through my gov. that they bought.
Geary - completely off-topic, but do you know what has happened at Quillette? Have they removed all reader comments, and the possibility to comment? Did they announce a change in policy?
Would you please stop writing dissertations after every Quillette article?