China’s Industrial Policies Work

So Copy Them

Washington’s focus on ending Beijing’s subsidies is illogical and self-defeating.

by Gabriel Wildau (November 17 2019)

China hawks are chastising President Donald Trump’s “phase one” trade deal because it focuses on increasing US exports while ignoring Beijing’s subsidies for favored industries. Instead of seeking to coerce China into abandoning policies that both sides agree benefit its economy, the US should seek to emulate them.

In one typical critique, experts at the Peterson Institute, a Washington think tank, lamented that Trump hasn’t explained “how his deal would tackle the Chinese subsidies that were the impetus for launching this trade war in the first place”. That’s a view shared by many in Washington. Though Trump himself often appears more concerned about bilateral deficits, it’s worth asking whether the concern over subsidies actually makes sense.

Until recently, mainstream economists and policymakers largely dismissed state-led industrial policy – a form of government intervention in the free market – as wasteful and ineffective. Government bureaucrats, the argument went, lack the ability to effectively pick winners among companies or industry sectors. The task is better left to venture capitalists and stock market investors. Moreover, a politicized process of distributing public money is inherently susceptible to rent-seeking and corruption.

===> Totten: Ha Ha! Please read

If this view is correct, then the US has little to fear from Chinese industrial policy. Let Beijing waste public resources and distort capital allocation, while Washington sticks to its free-market principles, confident that this approach will produce a more competitive economy in the long run.

Today, however, appraisals of China’s trade and commercial practices implicitly grant that its industrial policies are effective. And many economists now agree that this approach can succeed in promoting national leadership in strategic industries. If so, then it’s unreasonable to demand that China abandon policies to promote indigenous development – especially when the US government is actively blocking key Chinese companies like Huawei Technologies Compamy from accessing American-made technology.

At this point, it’s worth distinguishing between two categories of industrial policy. Traditional objections focused on commodity industries such as steel, where government support mainly leads to expanded production, without much innovation or value-chain advancement. Subsidies that mainly spur excess capacity produce negative-sum outcomes, and efforts to reduce such aid is worthwhile. China recently withdrew from an international forum designed to cooperatively manage excess steel capacity, claiming it has already achieved significant cuts, though the US and Europe disagree.

In the current trade war, however, US complaints mainly focus on a second category of subsidies: those targeted at “emerging and foundational” technology. Made in China 2025 is the most high-profile of Beijing’s initiatives to help its national champions win market share in strategic industries.

US objections implicitly concede two points: first, that the national identity of world-leading companies and research institutions, along with their employees, matters significantly for both security and economics; and second, that Chinese industrial policy is likely to succeed in tilting the balance toward Beijing. Yet if these premises hold, then China’s use of industrial policy is wise, and Washington’s refusal to adopt a comparable approach is foolish.

China’s recent launch of a second state-funded semiconductor development fund valued at $29 billion, following an earlier $20 billion fund for the same purpose, prompted a former US assistant trade representative to complain that “China is doubling-down on the state-led practices and policies that led to the trade war”. But China’s strategy resembles what Mariana Mazzucato, economist at University College London, calls The Entrepreneurial State (2013). Her book chronicles how state investments were crucial in fostering industries that the US still leads, such as IT, biotech, and fracking.

Renewing this approach in the US will require conservatives to set aside their aversion to government intervention. Liberals may need to accept lower social spending to pay for industrial policies that could be seen as “corporate welfare”. As Bloomberg Opinion’s Noah Smith has pointed out, the bad press generated by the failure of solar energy startup Solyndra, which received subsidized government loans from Barack Obama’s 2009 stimulus plan, has made such aid politically toxic. Yet failures will inevitably occur, even when industrial policies are properly designed and implemented.

A congressional advisory panel on artificial intelligence, chaired by ex-Google Chief Executive Officer Eric Schmidt, recently recommended that the US government “partner with the commercial sector” to help overcome substantial technical and financial barriers to AI research. Whatever its flaws, the Green New Deal is also based on an acknowledgement that relying exclusively on free markets is insufficient to achieve important national objectives.

A world in which two superpowers both plow money into advanced research and development is hardly a dystopian vision. On the contrary, the result could be faster productivity growth in both the US and China. And assuming the harshest scenarios for US-China “decoupling” don’t come to pass and technology supply chains remain globally integrated, the benefits of subsidies would be shared by end-users around the world.

How Does China Evaluate and Choose its Leaders?

Understanding China’s University System

by Larry Romanoff

Global Research (November 23 2019)

Many Westerners have at least a dim awareness of China’s Gaokao, the system of annual university entrance examinations, taken by about ten million students each year. This set of examinations is quite stiff and perhaps even harsh, covering many subjects and occupying three days. The tests require broad understanding, deep knowledge, and high intelligence, if one is to do well. These examinations are entirely merit-based and favoritism is impossible. Students who produce the highest grades in these examinations are in the top one percent of a pool of 1.5 billion people.

Few Westerners are aware that China also has a system of bar examinations which every graduate lawyer must pass in order to practice law in China. These are even more severe, requiring not only high intelligence but deep knowledge of the laws and a broad understanding of all matters legal, these exams being so difficult that many refuse to even attempt them. Of about 250,000 graduate lawyers who sit the exam, only about 20,000 will pass and obtain qualifications to actually practice law in China. If you meet a Chinese lawyer, you can be assured you are dealing with someone from top one perccent of that same pool of 1.5 billion people.

I mention these two items only to introduce a third – the Civil Service Examinations.

The Imperial civil service examinations were designed many centuries ago to select the best administrative officials for the state’s bureaucracy. They lasted as long as 72 hours and required a great depth and breadth of knowledge to pass. It was an eminently fair system in that the exam itself had no qualifications. Almost anyone, even from the least educated family in the poorest town, could sit the exam and, if that person did well enough, he or she could join the civil service and potentially rise to the top. The modern civil service examination system evolved from the imperial one, and today millions of graduates write these each year. They are extremely difficult. Of perhaps two million candidates only about 10,000 will get a pass. And that pass doesn’t get you a job; all it gets you is an interview.

When you meet some who has entered the civil service in China’s central government, you can rest assured you are speaking to a person who is not only exceptionally well educated and astonishingly knowledgeable on a broad range of national issues, but is in the top 0.1 percent of a pool of 1.5 billion people. China’s government officials are all highly-educated and trained engineers, economists, sociologists, scientists, often at a PhD level. We should here consider that the Chinese generally score about ten percent higher on standard IQ tests than do Caucasian Westerners. When we couple this with the Chinese process of weeding out all but the top 0.1 percent from consideration, and add further the prospect of doing the weeding from a pool of 1.5 billion people, you might expect the individuals in China’s Central Government to be rather better qualified than those of most other countries. And they are.

And the examination is only the beginning of thirty to forty years of an accumulation of the knowledge and experience necessary to become a member of China’s Central Government, the top one percent of this tiny group then forming the Politburo and one of these few becoming China’s President. These people who have passed the civil service examinations and will become the senior officials and civil servants in China’s national government, have entered a lifelong career in a formidable meritocracy where promotion and responsibility can be obtained only by demonstrated ability.

There are some who will tell you that family connections in China can produce a government job for some favored son, a claim that may be true for minor positions at a local level, though extremely difficult beyond that and impossible at the national level. No amount of connections will move anyone into senior positions or to the top of decision-making power, those places reserved for persons of deep experience and proven ability. It is also noteworthy that family wealth and influence plays no part in these appointments. Of China’s highest ruling body, the 25-member Politburo, only seven came from any background of wealth or power. The remainder, including China’s President and Prime Minister, came from backgrounds that offered no special advantages and rose to the top based on merit alone.

In contradistinction to the West, China’s system cannot produce incompetence at the top because in a population of 1.5 billion people there are too many available candidates with stunningly impressive credentials, and who are evaluated on the basis of real results rather than public popularity or TV charisma. These candidates are selected not only on intelligence and demonstrated proficiency but evaluated on their ability to unify the various social factions that exist in every nation and to create a consensus on a realisable vision for the country. They must further develop an expansive knowledge and understanding of the economy, of the nation, of foreign affairs, of China’s society and its problems, and of the best methods for achieving stability and rapid social and economic progress.

Contrast this with the Western system where politicians most often have no useful education and no relevant training or experience and, in fact political leadership of any Western nation has no credential requirements whatever, certainly not in education, experience or intelligence.

One of Canada’s recent Prime Ministers, Stephen Harper, had only a minor undergraduate degree and his only job was working in a corporate mail room when he joined the rump of a political party, became the party leader and eventually the Prime Minister. His successor, Justin Trudeau, was a school teacher whose father had been Canada’s Prime Minister many years prior, and whose only credential appeared to be a talent for working the political system. In Canada’s province of Alberta, a recent Premier was a former television news reporter, renowned more for being an habitual drunk than for intelligence or governing ability. US President George Bush was renowned for boasting that he never read any books, being nearly as painfully unintelligent as Ronald Reagan whose only credential was having been a C-class movie actor.

None of these men had a curriculum vitae (CV) sufficient to qualify as a manager of a 7-11 and none demonstrated signs of either intelligence or governing ability, yet a ludicrous and absurd political system permitted them to become the CEO of nations and provinces. The disparity between the quality of elected politicians in Western countries and the analogous officials in China’s government, especially at the national level in the Central Government, is a discrepancy so vast that comparisons are largely meaningless. Lee Kuan Yew, the founding father of Singapore, praised China’s President Xi Jinping as “a man of great breadth” and put him in “the Nelson Mandela class of persons”, saying “that man has iron in his soul”, and Xi has been widely praised (except in the US) as a man who “will become the first truly global leader”. These are not compliments we see being paid to Western politicians.

An examination of the backgrounds and credentials of politicians in any Western nation will reveal mostly a collection of politically-ambitious misfits strikingly lacking in redeeming qualities. It is not a surprise that Western politicians are ranked lower than prostitutes, used-car salesmen, and snakes in terms of both morality and trustworthiness. In one recent US public poll, the politicians of both houses of the entire US Congress were rated as less popular than cockroaches and lice {1}. It is accepted as a truism that all Western politicians will, after being elected, freely abandon the commitments made to the people immediately prior to being elected, political duplicity and cunning accepted as normal in all Western societies. This is so true that one US commentator recently remarked that “Of course, all politicians need to lie, but the Clintons do it with such ease that it’s troubling”. Such a thing is unheard of in China. Outright lying to the people would be fatal, but in the West dishonesty in politicians is accepted without a murmur.

There is another factor to consider, that of education and training. In the West, senior government officials – the politicians – are seldom renowned for competence and almost never have any useful experience. Moreover, for these Western politicians who exercise the decision power to shape a country, not only are there no credential requirements but there is in fact no governing education or training available. It is all a kind of “earn while you learn” system. But in China, entry is impossible without extreme credentials and, once in the system, the education and training are never-ending.


The World’s Number One University


It is not widely known in China, and not at all in the West, that hidden in Beijing is the top university in the world, one unlike any other, and whose qualities in conception and execution put all Western universities to shame. This University, sometimes called “the most mysterious school in China”, is the Central Party University, with a slate of both students and faculty that are an order of magnitude above colleges like Harvard, Cambridge, or the Sorbonne. To say that entrance qualifications are extreme, would be an understatement. This is not a place like Harvard where a $5 million donation to an endowment fund will obtain admission for your dim-witted son or daughter.

Originally founded in 1933, the University’s purpose is to educate and mature those individuals having passed the civil service examinations and to prepare them both in their career development and in the responsibilities of governing the world’s most populous nation. It is the training ground for future leaders of the country, and whose headmaster is usually the President of China {2}. To date, this university has trained perhaps 100,000 government leaders and high officials. The school is not normally open to the general public, but in the past few decades this university has offered some very high-level postgraduate and doctoral programs for about 500 non-official students, focusing on philosophy, economics, law, politics, and history.

The 100-hectare leafy campus is extremely quiet and here, unlike all other universities in China, we see no bicycles but instead the roads outside school buildings are lined with black Audis. The gates are under armed guard 24 hours a day, seven days a week, the security necessary for those who study there – provincial governors and ministers, young and middle-aged officials, their guest speakers and sometimes the country’s top leaders.

Not only are the admitted students the best and brightest of the top 0.1 percent, but the professors and lecturers at this Central Party University are unique in the world, a far cry from the adjutant part-time lecturers at most American universities. The professors here are the most competent in the nation. Guest lecturers sometimes include high-level Chinese officials and, in important topics of debate, the school has no hesitation in bringing in the world’s most renowned experts from any country on everything from economics and international finance to social policy, foreign policy, industrial policy, and even military matters. Further, these guest lecturers are often national leaders of other countries and other high-level foreign dignitaries, this to give Chinese officials not only a firm grounding in the knowledge and skills necessary to govern China, but also a wider horizon and better understanding of different cultures, values, and political systems.

The cornerstone of the school’s educational policy is that everything is on the table. There are no forbidden topics, and even reactionary, revolutionary, or just plain whacky positions are discussed, analysed, and debated to resolution. All manner of planning, problems, solutions, alternatives, will be discussed, examined, debated, explained, with any number of prominent experts available as reference material. When these sessions are completed, all students will have an MBA-level or better appreciation of the entire subject. And this is only one subject of many they will encounter.

When you consider that these officials entered the government with an already high level of education, and with an already demonstrated broad level of understanding and exceptional intelligence, these additional layers of training and education cannot help but produce an impressive level of overall knowledge and ability throughout the government. Nothing like this system exists in the West, which is why senior civil servants in most Western countries often look on their politician-leaders with a mixture of disdain and contempt for their lack of knowledge and ability.

The general process is that at various intervals the most promising young and middle-aged officials attend this university for up to a year at a time, to expand their knowledge and understanding of all issues relating to China and government, usually followed by a promotion. Stints at the Central Party University will alternate with rotating assignments in all manner of government Departments at the local, provincial, and national levels, as well as with assignments in various state-owned commercial enterprises. In most cases, these work and experience assignments are alternated with classroom time at this university, the students assimilating what they have learned in their prior assignment and receiving preparation for their next posting.

An individual might potentially rotate through a small local government, a corporate finance department, work as a local health care executive or provincial education head, become the mayor of a small city, the head of another corporate department, the mayor of a larger city, the governor of a province, a senior executive or CEO of a major state corporation, and so on, perhaps each time returning to the university for additional education and training.

At each stage, with each government or corporate posting, the incumbents are evaluated on a vast array of criteria. Those who continue to shine will continue to progress to postings of increased vision and responsibility. Those who appear to have reached their limit will be sidelined. They won’t be removed or fired, but will be given postings commensurate with their abilities, above which level they cannot rise. From all this, China has the only government system in the world that ensures competence at the top.

Consider the mayor of a city in a Western country. After one term in office, who evaluates this person? The general public, who have neither the training nor experience to perform such evaluations. The “public” do not understand the job or its requirements, and haven’t the facts on which to base an intelligent evaluation, resulting in what becomes essentially a popularity contest, superficialities being the deciding factors. In China’s system, this city mayor is evaluated by his seniors, men who were likely mayors of small and large cities before he was born, men who thoroughly understand every aspect of his job and who cannot be duped.

Few Westerners have bothered to learn even the simple basics about the form of China’s government, preferring instead to parrot foolish nonsense about China being a dictatorship or, as one writer recently stated, “a deeply tyrannical regime”. It is of course no such thing, the level of Western ideological blindness and willful ignorance being simply appalling. China has a one-party government, which Western ideologues denounce as heresy, but which manifests enormous advantages. With a one-party government, decision-making is not an unprincipled sport where my team has to win. It is simply a group of people with various viewpoints working together to obtain a consensus for policy and action for the overall good of their nation. Here, there is no forced separation of officials on the basis of political ideology. China’s entire social spectrum is represented in government in the same way as in Chinese or any other society. There is no partisan in-fighting. China’s system looks for consensus whereas Western political systems are based on conflict.

China’s government also has an “opposition”, but this body has two major differences from Western governments. First, it does not function to “oppose” but rather to consult, charged with the responsibility to consider not only the government’s directions and policies but also to devise alternatives and make recommendations. And the government must by law consider and respond to all these consultations – which it does. Second, this opposition group is not seen as consisting of the marginalised political losers as in the Western systems but a second tier of extremely competent people who were not selected to the top governing positions. And, rather than lose all this expertise, this secondary group was created to contribute to the development of their country.

The benefits of this system can be seen in its results. China has already far surpassed the undeveloped nations that adopted Western multi-party electoral governments, and certainly has a brighter future than most of them. Many foreign observers are finally admitting openly that China’s form of government exhibits signs of superiority over Western systems, and that it is largely responsible for China’s efficiency, for its rapid development, and for its speed of response. The “Free World” could learn a lot from China’s government system. It works, beautifully. It has transformed the economy and brought hundreds of millions out of poverty. It has put men into space, built the world’s fastest trains, the longest undersea tunnels, the world’s longest bridges, the largest dams. It is rapidly creating the world’s largest genuine middle class. And it’s hardly begun.


Larry Romanoff is a retired management consultant and businessman. He has held senior executive positions in international consulting firms, and owned an international import-export business. He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University, presenting case studies in international affairs to senior EMBA classes. Mr Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of ten books generally related to China and the West. He can be contacted at:



{2} By Li Jing and Peng Yining (China Daily); 2011-06-01

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article.

Copyright (c) Larry Romanoff, Global Research, 2019

History of Chinese Inventions

The Present and the Future. Recent Chinese State of the Art Innovations

by Larry Romanoff

Global Research (October 24 2019)

China as a nation has the longest and by far the vastest record of inventions in the history of the world. It is now reliably estimated that more than 60% of all the knowledge existing in the world today originated in China, a fact swept under the carpet by the West.

Joseph Needham, a British biochemist, scientific historian, and professor at Cambridge University, is widely rated as one of the most outstanding intellectuals of the 20th century. Chinese students visiting at Cambridge repeatedly informed him that Western scientific methods and discoveries discussed in his classes originated in China centuries before. Needham was so intrigued that he became fully fluent in Chinese, then travelled to China to investigate. He discovered voluminous evidence of the truth of those claims and decided to remain in China to write a book to document what he deemed a discovery of great importance to the world. Needham never completed his task of cataloguing the history of Chinese invention. His one book became 26 books and he died in 1995, with his work still continued today by his students. One good introduction to this topic is Robert Temple’s summary of Needham’s work. {1}

We were all taught in school that the printing press with movable type was invented in Germany by Johannes Gutenberg in about the year 1550. Not so. China not only invented paper but also the printing press with movable set type, which was in common use in China 1,000 years before Gutenberg was born. Similarly, we were taught that Englishman James Watt invented the steam engine. He did not. Steam engines were in widespread use in China 600 years before Watt was born. There are dated ancient texts and drawings to illustrate and prove the Chinese discovered and documented “Pascal’s Triangle” 600 years before Pascal copied it, and the Chinese enunciated Newton’s First Law of Motion 2,000 years before Newton.

The same is true for thousands of inventions that the West now claim as theirs but where conclusive documentation exists to prove that they originated in China hundreds and sometimes thousands of years before the West copied them. It was not for nothing that Marco Polo is described in China as “Europe’s great thief”. The next few paragraphs are adapted mainly from information in Temple’s book, which I strongly recommend.

The Chinese invented the decimal number system, decimal fractions, negative numbers, and the zero, so far in the past that the origin is lost in the mists of time. The Chinese tracked sunspots and comets with such detail and accuracy that these ancient records are still used as the basis for their prediction and observation today. The Chinese were drilling for natural gas about 2,500 years ago, wells 4,800 feet deep, with bamboo pipelines to deliver the gas to nearby cities. The Chinese pioneered the mining and use of coal long before it was known in the West. Marco Polo and Arab traders marveled at the “black stone” that the Chinese mined from the ground, that would burn slowly during an entire night.

China had printed paper money almost 1,500 years ago, done in ways to prevent counterfeiting. Wrapping paper, paper napkins, and toilet paper were all in general use in China 2,000 years before the West could produce them. They were the first to invent and develop a full mechanical clock with a true escapement, many centuries before the Swiss had done so. The Chinese invented an ingenious seismograph still in use that tells not only the severity but the direction and distance of earthquakes. The Chinese invented hot-air balloons, the parachute, manned flight with kites, the wheelbarrow, and matches. They invented hermetically-sealed laboratories for scientific experiments. They invented belt and chain drives, the paddlewheel steamer, the helicopter rotor and the propeller, the segmental-arch bridge. They invented the use of water power and chain pumps, the crank handle, all the construction methods for suspension bridges, sliding calipers, the fishing reel, image projection, magic lanterns, the gimbal system of suspension. China not only invented spinning wheels, carding machines and looms, but was the world’s leader in technical innovations in textile manufacturing, more than 700 years before Britain’s 18th century textile revolution.

Chinese expertise with fine porcelain was so advanced millennia ago, that even today it is admitted their ability has never even been equaled in the West, much less surpassed. The Chinese discovered not only magnetism but magnetic remanence and induction, as well as the compass. They invented gunpowder, smoke bombs, the cannon, the crossbow, plated body armor, fireworks, flamethrowers, grenades, land and sea mines, multi-stage rockets, mortars and repeating guns. China had irrigation canals that were also used for transport, and the Chinese invented the canal locks that could raise and lower boats to different levels 1,500 years before the Americans built the Panama Canal. China has earthquake-proof dams functioning today that were built around 250 BC.

A millennium ago, the Chinese conceived and developed the science of immunology – vaccinating people for diseases like smallpox, knowing how to extract and prepare the vaccine so as to immunise and not infect. They discovered the circadian rhythm in the human body, blood circulation and the science of endocrinology. The Chinese were using urine from pregnant women to make sex hormones 2,000 years ago, understanding how they acted on the body and how to use them. Many centuries-old Chinese medical books still exist, documenting all this and much more. Around 1550, China compiled a huge 52-volume Chinese Traditional Herbal Medicine encyclopedia that described almost 2,000 herbal sources and 10,000 medical prescriptions. Among them is chaulmoogra oil, which is still the only known treatment for leprosy.

China designed and built the world’s largest commercial ships, which were many times longer and ten times larger in volume than anything the West could build at the time. In the late 1500s the largest English ships displaced 400 tons, while China’s displaced more than 3,000 tons. Western ships were small, uncontrollable and fragile, and useless for travelling any distance. Thousands of years ago, Chinese ships had watertight compartments that permitted them to continue journeys even when damaged. Moreover, Chinese ships not only had multiple masts, but China invented the luff sails which permit us to sail almost into the wind, just as sailboats do today, and were therefore not dependent on wind direction for their travel. Their luff sails contained sewn-in bamboo battens that keep the sails full and aerodynamically efficient, as racing sailboats use today. The Chinese invented the ship’s rudder – something the Europeans never managed to do, able to steer themselves only with oars, and European sails permitted them to travel only in the direction of the wind, which meant a ship would have to remain in place, sometimes for months, awaiting a favorable wind.

Chinese maps were the best in the world, by orders of magnitude, for more than a millennium, and the precision of their maps became legendary, being far in advance of the West. The Chinese invented Mercator projections, relief maps, quantitative cartography and grid layouts. China had compasses and such extensive astronomical knowledge that they always knew where they were, could plot courses and follow them by both compass and star charts, and could sail wherever they wanted, regardless of the wind direction. As Needham pointed out, China was so far ahead of the Western world in sailing and navigation that comparisons are just embarrassing. It was only when the West managed to copy and steal China’s sailing and navigation technology that it was able to begin travelling the world and colonising it. James Petras wrote:



It is especially important to emphasize how China, the world technological power between 1100 and 1800, made the West’s emergence possible. It was only by borrowing and assimilating Chinese innovations that the West was able to make the transition to modern capitalist and imperialist economies. {2}


China was 1,000 years ahead of the West in anything to do with metals – cast iron, wrought iron, steel, carbon steel, tempered steel, welded steel. The Chinese were so skilled at metallurgy they could cast tuned bells that could produce any tone. Long before 1,000 AD, China was the world’s major steel producer. I believe it was James Petras who noted that in about 1,000 AD China was producing about 125,000 tons of steel per year, while 800 years later Britain could produce only 75,000 tons. {1} The Chinese invented the blast furnace, the double-action bellows to achieve the necessary high temperatures for smelting and annealing metals. They invented the manufacture of steel from cast iron. They excelled in creating metallic alloys, and very early were casting and forging coins made from copper, nickel, and zinc. The entire process of mining, smelting, and purifying zinc, originated in China. The Chinese developed the processes of mining itself, and the concentration and extraction of metals.

China was highly advanced in agriculture, having invented the winnowing fan and the seed drill, making an easy process of tilling, planting, and harvesting. Europeans and Americans were still seeding crops by scattering grain from a bag, a greatly wasteful practice that necessitated saving fifty percent of each year’s crop for seed. China developed scientifically efficient plows that have never been equaled and are still used all over the world today. They invented and developed animal harnesses and collars that first permitted horses to actually be used to pull loads. Europe had no efficient plow, and their only way of harnessing animals was to put a rope around their necks, which succeeded only in the animals strangling themselves. The Chinese invented saddles and the riding stirrup. China’s food production was orders of magnitude ahead of the world for more than 1,000 years, its advances in agriculture the enabling cause of Europe’s agricultural revolution that first permitted it to begin feeding itself adequately. The Chinese were wearing fine silk and cotton clothing and using toilet paper while centuries later Europeans were still wearing animal skins.

Few people in the West are familiar with China’s Armillary Spheres. These wonders of the world, cast in bronze several meters in diameter and beautifully decorated with dragons and phoenixes, are some of the oldest and most accurate astronomical observatory instruments in existence, some created more than 3,500 years ago when the Western countries had no knowledge of such things. They determine and measure the positions and equatorial ecliptic and horizontal coordinates of celestial bodies, the positions and daily motions of 1,500 stars and constellations, and much more. When the Western Forces invaded China in the late 1800s, they were so captivated that they plundered most of these treasures and the centuries of data from the ancient observatories, disassembling the instruments and removing them to Europe, returning some to China as part of the Treaties after the First World War.

It leaves one speechless to learn the vast extent of Chinese inventions that existed hundreds of years and often millennia, before they appeared in the West. Needham published not only ancient Chinese texts that can be accurately dated, but photos of old drawings that clearly depict all of these items. This isn’t a simple matter of gunpowder and fireworks, but of discovery that encompasses the entire range of human knowledge, all of which has been consciously hidden from the Western world. Needham made his discoveries in the 1940s, but neither Western education nor the media have ever referenced or acknowledged them. These are not mere claims; the evidence is conclusive and available for examination but the West has thoroughly erased China from the world’s historical memory.


Myth and Misrepresentation


Western historians have distorted and ignored China’s dominant role in the world economy until about 1800. There exists an enormous amount of empirical data proving China’s economic and technological superiority over Western civilization for the better part of several millennia. Given that China was the world’s supreme technological power up to about 1800, it is especially important to emphasize that this is what made the West’s emergence possible. It was only by copying and assimilating Chinese innovations and China’s much more advanced technology that the West was able to make the transition to modern capitalist and imperialist economies. Until then, China was the leading trading nation, reaching most of Southern Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and Europe. China’s innovations in the production of paper, book printing, firearms, and tools led to a manufacturing superpower whose goods were transported throughout the world by the most advanced navigational system. Moreover, banking, a stable paper money economy, excellent manufacturing and high agricultural yields resulted in China’s per capita income surpassing that of Great Britain until about 1800.

Not only this but, as James Petras pointed out,



… the majority of western economic historians have presented historical China as a stagnant, backward, parochial society, an “oriental despotism”.


China was never thus. During the 13th century, Marco Polo described China as vastly wealthier and more advanced than any European country, and leading European philosophers such as Voltaire looked to Chinese society as an intellectual exemplar, the British notably using China as their model for establishing a meritocratic civil service. {3}

A first thought when reviewing this research is that the world must have seemed very primitive to China 500 years ago, truly “third world” at the time. When Zhang He and others conducted their voyages of exploration, they must have been disappointed in what they found. The rest of the world had no paper or printing, no mathematics, no science, little medicine of note, almost no metallurgy to speak of, a most primitive agriculture, no manufactures of any worthy kind, no porcelain, no spinning wheels or weaving looms to make clothing. From reviewing the history of Chinese invention, one develops an increasingly strong feeling the Chinese looked at the world and found nothing of interest in all those societies that were centuries, and in some cases millennia, behind China in almost every way. One can easily theorise this is the reason China closed itself off from the world at that time, concluding that other nations were so backward that little would be gained from prolonged contact. One can imagine they returned home and closed the door, perhaps planning to return in another 500 years to see if things had progressed. With the addition of detail, this is most likely how events transpired.

What China didn’t expect, was the West stealing all these ideas, turning them into weapons of colonisation and war, returning to the nation that was the source of that knowledge, and invading it to colonise, to steal resources, and to enslave and massacre the population. China’s interest was always only exploration and trade. The Chinese were never expansionist or warlike, wanting only to protect their own borders from invasion from the North. China was quite unprepared for the violent nature and savage brutality of the White man who sailed the world, invoking his God’s blessing on his countless atrocities. Coupled with a weak domestic government and the inventiveness of the Baghdad Jews in using opium to reap billions while enslaving a nation under the protection of the British military, we have the severe downward swing for 200 years.


Two Great Historical Tragedies


The above summary doesn’t even begin to adequately catalog of the extent of Chinese invention, of the sum of China’s discoveries and contributions to the modern world. But unfortunately, much of China’s total sum of knowledge and history of invention is lost to the world forever. A large part of the recorded knowledge of China’s history was destroyed in one of the greatest acts of cultural genocide in the history of the world – the looting and burning of China’s Summer Palace, the Yuanmingyuan, which contained more than ten million of the finest and most valuable historical treasures and scholarly works from 5,000 years of Chinese history. What could not be looted was destroyed, and the entire massive palace burned to the ground. This wanton theft and utter destruction of one of the world’s greatest collections of historical knowledge was engineered by the Rothschilds and Sassoons in retaliation for Chinese resistance to their opium. {4} {5}

This is an aside, but the destruction of the Yuanmingyuan was done for the same reason that the Allies bombed Dresden to rubble during the Second World War. Dresden had no military value but it was the spiritual and cultural heart of Germany, its destruction meant “to open a wound in the German soul that would never heal”. For precisely the same reason, the American “deep state” was savagely determined to drop the first atomic bomb on Kyoto, also the heart and soul of Japanese culture. Kyoto was protected by Providence, with heavy overcasts of clouds that preventing the bombers from locating it with sufficient accuracy, forcing them to their alternates of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

But in terms of the destruction of a literary recording of culture and invention, there was perhaps an even greater crime against the history of Chinese knowledge – the destruction of the library and the Yongle Dadian at the Hanlin Academy. {6} That encyclopedia of 22,000 volumes written by more than 2,000 scholars over many years, contained much of the total of 5,000 years of Chinese knowledge, invention and thought. The British carried all those books outdoors, poured fuel on them, and burnt the entire collection to ashes. Only God knows what was lost in this tragic destruction, ordered by the same drug dealers as punishment for refusing opium, meant to break China’s will by striking at the very heart of the nation’s culture in the wanton destruction of something of such inestimable value as to leave an open wound that would never heal. Only about 150 volumes survived the incineration, forty those residing today in the US Library of Congress, which has no intention of returning them to China.


Darwinism at its Finest


Westerners today justify their unacknowledged appropriation of Chinese knowledge and subsequent claims to ownership on some variant of the proposition that the Chinese invented those things, but never developed or capitalised on them, but the claim is invalid self-serving nonsense since my invention is mine whether or not I choose to develop it. The claim is also untrue.

When the Chinese invented paper and printing, books became widespread throughout China, as with the weaving of cloth and development of textiles. China employed its inventions in unlimited ways for the benefit of Chinese society. What they did not do is file patents, convert everything to privately-owned Intellectual Property (IP), and transfer their ingenuity from social benefit to private profit. Criticisms of China’s use of its inventions are not so much negating a lack of application but the absence of commercialisation, these Western justifications implying that any nation not immediately striving for profit maximisation of its discoveries is morally negligent, the theft of those discoveries then justified by those who would use them more properly. This is the bank robber taking the high moral ground by claiming he put the money to better use than the bank would have done.

To have foregone private commercialisation was neither a character flaw nor a behavioral fault, but a reflection of the pluralistic and socialistic nature of the Chinese people, the same reason that even today China’s patent and IP laws and regulations are so much less aggressive than those of the US. Put simply, China has never been as capitalistic or as individualistic as the West. It is part of the greatness of the Chinese nation that this immense population engaged in millennia of stunning research, discovery, and invention and freely distributed those fruits throughout the nation. This emphasis on the greater good and overall benefit to society rather than individual profit, is fundamental to the natural humanity of the Chinese people, and cannot be permitted to be destroyed by the sociopathic Western model so forcefully promoted today on the basis of a fictitious moral superiority.

The West chooses to ignore the fact that the 200-year hiatus in China’s innovation was due almost entirely to their own military invasions, when the West was ravaging and destroying the nation. China’s development, social progress, and invention, ceased only from the invasions by both the Americans and Europeans, and most especially with the Jews’ vast program of trafficking in opium in China.

Perhaps of more direct interest is that China’s lag in current technology is, more than anything else, an unfortunate accident of fate that occurred during a blip in time. After Mao evicted all the foreigners and China shook off the effects of 200 years of foreign interference and plundering to begin the transition to an industrialised economy, this was precisely when the world of electronics and communication exploded. It was during that brief period of a couple of decades that computers, the Internet, mobile phones and so much more, were conceived and patented by the West. Virtually the entire process passed China by, because during that brief period the nation was entirely enveloped in the fundamentals of its economic and social revolution, and in no position to participate. China’s lack of patents and IP in the field of electronics today is due neither to Western superiority nor Chinese lack of innovation, but to Western aggression. The accumulation of American and European patents was in no way due to Western supremacy in innovation but to the absence of the Chinese.


The Present and the Future


China’s inventiveness has not ended. With China recovering and once again taking its rightful place in the world, it is continuing where it left off 200 years ago. Ignoring the historical setback, Chinese companies are simply by-passing the earlier stages of innovation by foreign firms and proceeding to subsequent stages where the field is open and foreign patents have not precluded innovation and development.

If we examine the fields where China lags today in terms of patents and IP, it is primarily in those areas of science that progressed during that brief period where China was unable to participate. As soon as China found its footing, innovation continued unabated as it had for thousands of years. China missed the computer and Smartphone patents, but was perfectly timed for the solar panel revolution and quickly emerged as the world leader – at which point the US imposed tariffs of 300% on Chinese solar panels in an attempt not so much to kill China’s export sales but to prevent the accumulation of funds for further R&D. In any area not pre-empted by IP restriction, China’s innovation has soared – usually to world leadership.

Despite US accusations of China copying foreign technology, China’s high-technology achievements were entirely home-grown because the US has been so determined to hinder China’s rise that by 1950 it engineered an international embargo on all scientific knowledge and on almost all useful products and processes to China, including legislation that Chinese scientists cannot be invited to, or participate in, American scientific forums, while bullying other Western nations into doing the same. In October of 2019, all Chinese scientists and space technology companies were denied visas to attend the weeklong International Astronautical Congress in Washington, far from the first time such has occurred.

We hear much in the Western media about China demanding technology transfers as a condition of corporate residence in China, but this is mostly propaganda. No doubt expectations for technology and knowhow transfer do occur, since China doesn’t want to spend the rest of its life making toasters and running shoes but, since entry to the Chinese market is a gift of billions in profits, it is perfectly sensible to attach a price to it. However, one must keep in mind that no foreign company is conducting cutting-edge commercial or sensitive military research, or manufacturing quantum computers and hypersonic missiles in China. Any technology actually available for transfer would be almost entirely in consumer goods, and hardly constitute great value or threats to US “national security”. And, in virtually all of the cutting-edge fields and industries such as quantum computing, 5G telecom or solar energy, China has already surpassed the US.


A Brief List of Recent Chinese Innovation


In 2015, Chinese engineers announced the world’s first quantum communications network, a 2,000 kilometer system linking Beijing and Shanghai with data transmission encoded by quantum key distribution. In August of 2016 China launched the world’s first quantum communications satellite, and succeeded in test communication with the country’s existing ground stations. In September of 2016, Chinese scientists achieved the world’s first quantum teleportation between independent sources, delivering quantum information enciphered in photons between two locations.

In 2014, researchers at Nankai University in Tianjin developed a car with a working brain-control unit, with sensors that capture brain signals permitting humans to control the automobile with their minds. In 2016 China launched a fully-operational space lab to conduct the first ever brain-machine interaction experiments in space. Chinese scientists believe brain-computer interaction will eventually be the highest form of human-machine communication, having developed this process much farther than any Western nation and holding nearly 100 patents.

In 2015, high school students from Tianjin won an International gold medal for the creation of a microbe biological battery. Such attempts in the past have failed due to poor performance and limited usefulness, but these students conceived the idea of combining several types of bacteria into one biological power cell, with each bacterium having specialised responsibilities based on its own unique functions. Their tiny multi-bacteria cell reached over 520 mV, and lasted over eighty hours. Scaled up, their biological battery was able to generate as much power as a lithium battery, with a much longer life and producing no pollution. These are Chinese high school kids.

In 2015 Chinese scientists succeeded in modifying a human embryo to permit the changes to persist through future generations, something that had never been accomplished before, to alter human DNA for removal of dangerous or undesired genes from future generations. Chinese researchers are developing the technology and processes to make 3D-printed skin a reality, custom-made skin for burn patients, printed according to their wounds. The country leads the world in cat-scan technology, in DNA mapping and synthesising, and many medical fields such as laser eye surgery and cornea transplants.

In May of 2019, a Chinese start-up launched a revolutionary AI chip with the computing power of eight NVIDIA P4 servers but up to five times faster, with half the size and twenty percent of the energy consumption, and costing fifty percent less to manufacture. Shanghai’s Fudan University developed a transistor based on two-dimensional molybdic sulfide, meaning computing and data storage happen together in a single cell, perhaps eliminating silicon-based chips which are at their limit. DJI Technology, founded by a Chinese university student, has become in only a few years the global market leader in small consumer drones, and already attracting American sanctions for being too successful in an area the US wants to control. The country produces nearly forty percent of the world’s robots, with vastly improved core technologies, and is the world leader in 5G technology.

Chinese engineers created a supercomputer seven times faster than America’s Oak Ridge installation, the first in the world to achieve speeds beyond 100 PetaFlops, powered by a Chinese-developed multi-core CPU and Chinese software, while displacing the US with the most supercomputers in the top 500. Upon the revelation of China’s super-fast supercomputer, authorities reported the NSA had launched hundreds of thousands of hacking attacks, looking to steal the technology for China’s new microprocessors.

China’s megaproject engineering skills are already legendary, with the longest sea bridges, the longest tunnels, the largest deep-water ports. China has built the world’s longest and highest glass bridge in Zhangjiajie, hanging between two steep cliffs 300 meters above the ground, and which set ten world records spanning its design and construction. The Three Gorges Dam is the world’s largest, with five-tier ship locks which can contain the world’s largest ships, and also a shiplift for smaller vessels which is the largest and most sophisticated in the world. China has formulated plans to build an electron collider, four times as long (100 kilometers) and operating at more than seven times the energy capacity of the European CERN. In 2015, Chinese scientists completed the 500-meter radio telescope, by far the largest in the world with more than ten times the area of the American installation in Puerto Rico.

In 2014, architects in Amsterdam began work on what was to be the world’s first completely 3D-printed house, a costly enterprise requiring three years. At exactly the same time in Shanghai, a Chinese company completed ten 3D-printed houses in less than a day, at a cost of less than $5,000 each, using recycled construction and industrial scrap as the “ink”. I have seen these homes; large, elegant, multi-story European-styled structures, and so sturdy they can withstand earthquakes up to level eight on the Richter scale.

We know about China’s fabulous high-speed trains, but few outside China are aware of the intense high quality of the HSR network, built with the highest standards in the modern world, including stability. When traveling by train I sometimes place a coin on its edge on the windowsill, and I have video of the coin remaining stable for four or five minutes before it finally falls over – and this is at 300 kilometers per hour. Shanghai has a high-speed Maglev train (430 kilometers per hour), while many cities have low-speed Maglevs (kilometers per hour), and Chinese engineers are ready to produce commercially a 600 kilometers per hour Maglev. The same pace of development is true of the nation’s urban subway systems. I have lost the source for these figures, but the city of London needed 147 years to build 408 kilometers of subway lines, New York City 106 years for 370 kilometers, Paris 110 years for 215 kilometers, while Shanghai needed only twenty years to build 500 kilometers.

It has escaped attention that these achievements were not sudden, but developed from a deliberate plan in execution for thirty years, though it is only recently that many of these efforts are bearing fruit. More importantly, China accomplished this from a third-world industrial base while under a total Western embargo on technology transfer. Chinese scientists have developed nuclear energy plants, put men into space, photographed the entire surface of the moon, built a space station, designed and launched a private GPS system. We have Chinese-designed and built deep-sea submersibles, and the country is rapidly developing its own aircraft industry. Today, with its science and technological base so much more advanced, and with education spending increasing at nearly ten percent per year, and very high R&D expenditures, invention and innovation can only increase.


A Closing Note


One of the most persistent myths propagated about China, a claim without a shred of supporting evidence, is that Chinese lack creativity and innovation due to flaws in their educational system. We have seen the accusations hundreds of times: China’s educational system teaches only rote memory while stifling innovation, the Chinese unable to conceptualise or innovate, knowing only how to achieve high test scores but not how to think. Here is Carly Fiorina speaking, the former CEO of H-P:



I’ve been doing business in China for decades, and I will tell you that yeah, the Chinese can take a test, but what they can’t do is innovate. They’re not terribly imaginative. They’re not entrepreneurial. They don’t innovate. That’s why they’re stealing our intellectual property … innovation and entrepreneurship are not their strong suits. Their society, as well as their educational system, is too homogenized and controlled to encourage imagination … {7}


The claim is complete rubbish for more reasons than I have room to account here.

In 2015, Eva Dou reported in The Wall Street Journal of a study by McKinsey who claimed that China had made all the “easy” innovations, like making products better and cheaper, but that “the country has limited success stories in ‘more challenging’ types of innovation that rely on scientific or engineering breakthroughs”. McKinsey’s conclusions are not supported by the evidence listed here. {8}


Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Larry Romanoff is a frequent contributor to Global Research.


{1} Robert Temple, The Genius of China: 3,000 Years of Science, Discovery, and Invention

{2} James Petras, “China: Rise, Fall and Re-Emergence as a Global Power; Some Lessons from the Past”

{3} Ron Unz, The American Conservative (April 18 2012) “China’s Rise, America’s Fall; Why Nations Fail”

{4} “China Remembers a Vast Crime”, The New York Times

{5} “Peking’s Summer Palace destroyed”,

{6} “The Destruction of a Great Library: China’s Loss Belongs to the World,

{7} “Ex-HP CEO Carly Fiorina says Chinese don’t innovate”, Time

{8} “Chinese Innovation: Now Comes the Hard Part, Says Study”

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author{s}. The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article.

Copyright (c) Larry Romanoff, Global Research, 2019

The Untold Truth about Xinjiang

Western media refuse to report reality

by Xie Wenting and Bai Yunyi

Global Times (March 20 2019)

Residents chat with neighbors about their daily life on February 15 in Yusitunke Ayikule village of Awati county in Aksu Prefecture in Northwest China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region. Photo: Liu Xin/GT


Editor’s Note


Misleading headlines, groundless accusations, obscure interviewees, double standards are not hard to spot in many articles covering China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region in Western media outlets.

Recent months have seen an intensive outburst of such reports which have tainted China’s anti-terrorism efforts in the region by adopting tactics including using words with a negative connotation, providing incomplete information, and stirring readers’ emotions.

Global Times reporters Xie Wenting and Bai Yunyi researched Xinjiang reporting in the Western media and interviewed American YouTuber Nathan Rich, Kurbanjan Samat, a Uyghur photographer and director who shoots stories about people from Xinjiang, and Erkin Oncan, a Turkish journalist focused on Xinjiang reporting.


Fabricating “Truth”


“For me, you haven’t seen things like this since the 1930s”, said Michael Kozak, head of the US State Department’s human rights and democracy bureau, at a news briefing on March 13 about China’s treatment of Muslims in Xinjiang.

“Rounding up, in some estimations … in the millions of people, putting them into camps, and torturing them, abusing them, and trying to basically erase their culture and their religion and so on from their DNA. It’s just remarkably awful”, Kozak said, according to a Reuters report.

The use of the pejorative word “camp” for a “vocational education and training center” was not only evident in Kozak’s speech, but is also frequently used in Western media reports.

“The use of the word ‘camp’ or ‘concentration camp’ has a negative connotation in English, which directly invokes imagery of Nazis and Nazism”, said Nathan Rich, a US citizen who is also a technical executive at a Beijing-based company.

Rich gained fame in China last month when he released a video slamming a report by The New York Times about China’s medical system.

The video has garnered tens of millions of views on social media platforms.

For Rich, himself a Jew, drawing parallels between Nazism and the Chinese government is “totally insane”.

“It’s very strange – it’s just an overt attempt to use suggestive propaganda”, Rich said.

“Nazis murdered Jews who had done nothing wrong, but in Xinjiang, the regional government only tries to limit the actions of those who have committed crimes or are suspected of terrorism”, he said.

Shohrat Zakir, chairman of the Xinjiang regional government, said on the sidelines of this year’s two sessions in Beijing that Xinjiang is a victim of terrorism and extremism and the vocational education and training centers aim to fundamentally eliminate the environment for terrorism and extremism.

“It is not targeting specific ethnic groups or specific religions. Instead, it is targeting the three forces of violent terrorist crimes, extremism and separatism”, he said.

Besides deliberately choosing negative words, some Western media reports just simply resorted to lies.

On January 21, CNN issued a report in which it interviewed Mihrigul Tursun, who alleged her son had died at Urumqi children’s hospital in Xinjiang in 2015. “I will tell them everything”, Tursun said in the CNN report. “I will tell them the Chinese government killed their brother”.

Tursun also claimed that she witnessed the death of nine Uyghur women when she was detained in Urumqi’s prison.

This report was slammed by Hua Chunying, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson, who provided concrete evidence.

Hua said that Tursun’s son was sent to Urumqi children’s hospital in January, May and November 2016 with pneumonia, hydrocephalus, and other illnesses.

The official record showed Tursun and her husband took the child out of China in April 2018.

According to Hua, on April 21 2017, Mihrigul was taken into custody by the public security bureau of Qiemo county on suspicion of inciting ethnic hatred and discrimination. She was released twenty days later after being found to have infectious disease out of humanitarian consideration.

Mihrigul had never been detained by police in Urumqi, neither had she been jailed or put into any vocational education and training center, Hua said.

While Western news agencies extensively rely on sources from websites and social accounts run by East Turkestan terrorists, Kurbanjan Samat, a Uyghur photographer and documentary director, told the Global Times that the authenticity of these materials was questionable.

Kurbanjan has seen how his works were “transformed” by East Turkestan terrorists with fake captions added to fool the public.

Kurbanjan once shot a series of photos about a small village in Xinjiang’s Hotan in 2006 and 2007. The village is off the beaten path even for locals in Hotan due to inconvenient transportation. “I simply recorded the life and culture of the local people back then. The village later had a good development”, he said.

To his surprise, he later found out that some of his photos were deliberately chosen by East Turkestan terrorists and were used in their accounts with texts such as “how miserably people in Xinjiang live under the governance of the Chinese government”.

This was “a complete distortion of facts”, he said.

Erkin Oncan, a Turkish journalist, told the Global Times many Western news agencies’ reports about Xinjiang are based on the allegations of NGOs that are run by East Turkestan terrorists and funded by the West.

Oncan has focused on Xinjiang for many years and he also traces jihadist movements in Turkey, Syria, and Afghanistan.

Public data showed that the Uyghur Human Rights Project and World Uygur Congress, citing sources in Western reports, receive funds from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). NED is also known as a “shadow CIA.”

“I realized the Western media’s provocative and misleading attitude when I started to compare the news about Xinjiang. I saw their reports about the region were written with no source and based on unreliable things”, Oncan said.

What these Western media outlets are doing isn’t caring about Muslims’ life in China, but “a political agenda of the Western countries against China”, he added.


Double Standards


Rich said many Western media framed reports in a sensational way to mislead readers.

He provided examples, such as “sweeping campaign to detain and indoctrinate Muslims”, and “China’s Xinjiang experience demonstrates the peril of large-scale anti-Muslim policies” in Western media.

Rich said this totally “doesn’t make sense”. In cities including Beijing and Xi’an where he has been, Muslims live a peaceful life.

Also, as he pointed out, the Chinese government’s governance in Xinjiang has never been about hatred toward Muslims and what the government is trying to do is to stamp out terrorism in the region.

According to Rich, the malicious accusations against China’s anti-terrorism efforts in Xinjiang reflect double standards, given that the US has led the war on terrorism for many years.

Following the September 11 attacks, the US has led a war on terrorism in Afghanistan and other nations, striking and bombing them, which continues to cause a significant number of civilian deaths, Rich said.

To wage a war on terrorism which is not in your country is different from waging a war on terror in your country. If Americans woke up tomorrow and found that, for example, Libya had just suddenly appeared in the middle of Texas, what would be the solution to the inevitable terrorism that would happen?”

The best way, he said, might be to declare “martial law”, limit certain people’s travel, and investigate where this terrorism comes from.

Kurbanjan pointed out that the biggest “double standards” in the Western media’s Xinjiang coverage is that they only reported the so-called “results”, but they failed to tap into the underlying reasons, background, and process.

Kurbanjan cites his own experience in Hotan as an example.

Hotan was once plagued with separatism and extremist ideology, where all women were required to wear back clothes, headscarves, and face veils.

But his mother didn’t want to wear the veil to cover her face. His sister was also unwilling to wear a headscarf and insisted on going to school.

“Because of this, my family was isolated and scolded by other people. We had to live an almost isolated life for twenty years. But the Western media won’t tell you this”, he said.

Selective reporting materials are also reflected in Mihrigul Tursun’s case. Most Western media turned a blind eye to China’s evidence.

Rich told the Global Times that “If you try to understand China’s actions while assuming they are ‘anti-Muslim’, as portrayed by some Western media, many things don’t add up. It doesn’t make sense.”

Due to anti-terrorism efforts in the region, the local economy is on the rise in the past few years and more women are freed from domestic violence and free to control their own life.

Even in the photo coverage, many Western media tend to shoot police and police cars on Xinjiang streets to reflect their angle of suppression and strict supervision.

But what they do not mention is that these are security measures taken after a serious of terrorist tragedies and they help ensure a peaceful environment.

The Western media also like to photograph pedestrians with their heads down to create a depressing atmosphere.

But in fact, on the streets and in the squares of Xinjiang, relaxed and light-hearted citizens are everywhere but unable to enter the lens of Western media.

“With using fancy language, with police or Muslim photos, they are trying to create an image”, said Oncan.


Discourse Hegemony


Another notable characteristic of the Western media’s Xinjiang reports is their discourse hegemony.

They place themselves at the commanding heights of “human rights” and do not allow doubts or critical voices to exist.

In a previous interview with the Global Times, many foreigners told reporters that they did not dare to make any positive comments on China’s governance in Xinjiang, as it would quickly incur suspicions and even attacks.

Oncan said he tried to argue with Western journalists about their biased reports.

But when he brought this up with Western journalists, he only got the same answers all the time.

He said:



In every stage of China’s governance, they claim China as an “oppressive” country, but this allegation is their main excuse for fabricating false news. With doing this, they thought that they can write whatever they want, and when the proof has been asked for, they answer “We don’t have it. Because as an oppressive country, China has closed itself to the outside world for searching into the allegations.”


But China has already invited politicians and journalists from other countries to the region, Oncan said.

The regional government has organized tours for diplomats and media delegates from other countries to visit Xinjiang.

Some journalists have published articles which credited the regional government’s work but these words weren’t seen in the Western media.

For defending China’s policy in Xinjiang, Oncan is threatened by East Turkestan terrorists and other people holding different opinions in Turkey.

He said:



When they couldn’t answer the facts about Xinjiang, they choose to accuse me of “being a spy” and try to discredit me. They even claimed that my name was also given by Chinese authorities, because Erkin is also a Uyghur name. They are also trying to link my journalism activities with an intelligence agency.


Oncan said he has received threats like “Wherever he appears, his head should be separated from his body”.

Kurbanjan also revealed to the Global Times that when he was working overseas he was tracked and his personal safety was threatened by people who disagree with his Xinjiang views.

One time in the US as he finished talking to his interviewee from Xinjiang, three young men carrying baseball bats approached, threatening to beat him.

Oncan told the Global Times that he doesn’t worry about his personal safety.

“Because I know that the truth always wins”, he said.

Understanding China

by Larry Romanoff

Global Research (November 20 2019)

We have a saying that after spending one month in China you could write a book; after a year in China, you could write a chapter; in five years you could write a paragraph, and after five years you could write a note on a postcard.

That saying has become almost an urban legend but it is essentially true. I can still recall the day when, walking down a street in downtown Shanghai after being in the country for about a month, I experienced an illusion of such extreme clarity that I said to myself, “I could write a book on this place”. I cannot explain the mental or sociological processes that combine to cause that initial illusion of understanding and clarity, nor the forces that so effectively and progressively dismantle it to a condition where the more time we spend in China the less we understand it.

My Chinese friends tell me I have a deep understanding of China, of its people and culture and, while the praise is flattering, it is also largely undeserved. Indeed, after fifteen years in the country, there are days when I am blindsided by something so basic that I am convinced I understand nothing, and I would have to say that if China cannot be understood by Westerners from the inside, it most assuredly cannot be understood by Westerners from the outside who have no useful contact with anything Chinese.

Westerners live in an illusionary black and white world framed for them by the programming from their Zionist media and are mostly incapable of escaping their ideological indoctrination. There is an adage that you cannot understand a painting when you are inside the painting, that you must step out of that painting and look back on it, to see it as it really is. Few Westerners are capable of this because of the propagandised indoctrination taking place from birth. This social indoctrination is true of course for all societies, but the Zionist West, unlike the vast majority of the world’s population, views virtually everything about other nations and peoples through a series of political-religious ideological lenses that cast a rather severe chromatic aberration on anything seen through those lenses.

These ideologies are of capitalism, democracy, colonialism, militarism, White supremacy, Darwinism, Christianity, and Zionism, these forces conspiring to twist the truths of China so as to almost eliminate any possibility of real understanding while simultaneously disdaining any real need to do so. The White man, the Zionist West, here including Japan, sees the world as Metropole and periphery, the non-white world populated by inferior beings meant to be exploited by coercion or military force, their resources used to enthrone the West while enslaving the world, all according to God’s plan. To see the truth of this, we need only examine their deeds, history providing ample testimony to this assertion.

The Western media are notorious for their incessant and shrill China-bashing, but it seems true that virtually everyone outside China is reading from the same script. We must have hundreds of publications and websites named China Labor Bulletin, China Economic Review, China Auto News, China anything and everything … that are not in any sense Chinese, but are media sources established by Westerners who are primarily but not exclusively Zionists and who, mostly deliberately, misinterpret and misrepresent the facts and fundamentals of China. We have Western-produced statistics on everything related to China, from GINI coefficients to bank debt, from GDP to National Income and standard of living, from education to healthcare to longevity and infant mortality, all of which, even when based on numbers initially obtained from official Chinese government sources, are then massaged and misrepresented to prove the opposite of reality. We have hundreds, and perhaps even thousands, of books about China, mostly written by these same people viewing the country through those same ideological lenses and thus mostly being works of historical fiction, many reprehensibly so.

The ingrained notion of superiority, white supremacy in fact, is a major obstacle to understanding even for the well-intentioned. When the Chinese travel to a foreign land and witness a foreign culture, they think “I’m different”. When Americans (and Canadians, Brits, Aussies) encounter a foreign culture, they think “I’m better”. It is also true that the Americans particularly, but the entire white and English-speaking world in total, have no respect for, and see no value in, any other culture, secretly believing that all the world wants to be like them and that claims to cultural protection are merely an excuse to avoid the inevitable, which is to become American clones. It is in this combined and complicated context that sincere individual Westerners attempt to understand China, an exceedingly difficult task in the circumstances.

The Chinese are not handicapped by the horrors of Christianity or party politics, and they mostly do not view outside events through a distorting lens. Westerners are fond of portraying the Chinese as being brainwashed, but in my long experience the Chinese are the least brainwashed of all peoples while Americans are the poster boys in this regard.

Due to all of the above, when Westerners look at any aspect of China, they may see it clearly, but most often do not understand what they see. Because they view the world through their ideological lenses, they interpret their misunderstanding in terms of what that event would mean if occurring in their country and in their culture. And from this misinterpretation of a misunderstanding, they then make judgments and form conclusions which are invariably wrong and often foolish.

As one example, a high-ranking American politician said recently in an interview that the Chinese need to rid themselves of what she termed their “shyness and lack of confidence”. It was beyond the limits of her understanding to realise that what she was seeing was neither shyness nor a lack of confidence, but modesty, one of the most beautiful characteristics of the Chinese people. Noah Webster wrote “modesty results from purity of mind”, and further that “unaffected modesty is the sweetest charm of female excellence, the richest gem in the diadem of their honor”. Westerners are often tempted to agree with the above politician’s appraisal because Chinese will seldom react or respond to these open provocations; however, the lack of response is most often simply because the Chinese are too modest and polite to tell you what they really think of you. I can testify that the Chinese are not lacking in confidence compared to any other civilisation, and also that they have little respect for the American version of “in your face” which they view not as confidence but as arrogance, rudeness, and disrespect. And yes, I know better than you that some Chinese can behave very badly, many tourists coming to mind, but these are in no way typical Chinese but some kind of aberrational subset I have not yet been able to clearly define.

As another example, I was walking down a street with an American acquaintance who commented on the proliferation of “wheelchair ramps” which appear on virtually every street intersection in every city small and large. He then proceeded to give me a dissertation on China, the Chinese people, and the Chinese culture, based on the apparent ubiquity of these passages. I had to interrupt my education to inform him that those were not wheelchair ramps but were instead designed for bicycles.

More than a few Western journalists have told us that China’s conviction rate for accused criminals is 99.9%, this number having been extracted from thin air because China does not assemble and publish those statistics for all levels of courts from all cities, towns, and counties. However, the comparable conviction rate in the West, at least for Canada and the US, is about sixty percent or a bit less, this differential attributed to the highest level of democratic virginity in the West and an extraordinarily high level of police and judicial corruption in China. But is that necessarily true?

More importantly, what does the sixty percent Western conviction rate mean? It means that nearly half of all the people charged with a crime, were in fact innocent and that it required the trauma and expense of a court trial to keep an innocent man out of prison. Or, if we want to be stubborn, we can look at this from the other side and claim that 100% of those charged were in fact guilty, but that a clever and expensive lawyer let them walk free. Is that better?

It is true that China has a high conviction rate, but that is because Chinese police conduct what are perhaps the most thorough and conscientious investigations of any country. The police will not lay a charge until they are 100% certain of a man’s guilt and also that they have not only sufficient evidence for a conviction but also the greatest volume of circumstantial evidence for a judge to determine the most appropriate sentence. It is the Western system that is corrupt and badly flawed, not China’s, and China has no FBI to lay fraudulent charges as a method of harassing political dissidents.

I was once standing on the Maglev platform at Shanghai’s Pudong Airport, and watched while a man and his wife were having a heated discussion with a policeman that lasted for several minutes. I wasn’t close enough to learn the topic of their debate, but the argument ended with the man’s wife kicking the policeman in the shins. I can think of more than a few Western cities where that wouldn’t have been a good idea.

The truth is that people in China are not afraid of the police. In Canada or the US nobody will pass a police car that is driving at the speed limit on a highway, but in China it happens all the time. I commented on that to a friend who said, “Why should I be afraid of him? He’s my servant, not my master.” In China, I can argue with a policeman and challenge his conclusions without fear of arrest for “disorderly conduct”, but in real life it goes much farther than this.

I once lit a cigarette in a shopping mall (Yes, I know. Don’t tell me), and a policeman approached to tell me I couldn’t smoke in the mall. Of course I already knew that; I was preoccupied and wasn’t thinking. I told him that, and I apologised and told him I would leave. He walked me part way to the door, his colleague joined us and said something humorous and we laughed, and I went outdoors. I saw them when I returned, I waved and they waved back, and we were friends. The important consideration is that he didn’t want to punish me; he didn’t want to start a war; he just didn’t want me to smoke in his mall. So long as I was willing, a warning was sufficient.

If I accidentally drive my car where I shouldn’t, the result is the same. In Chinese cities, we sometimes see a car parked on a sidewalk, this usually because the owner has an urgent necessity to stop for only a minute in an urban area where parking is almost non-existent and traffic is heavy. But so long as the street is clear and the sidewalk has sufficient room for pedestrians to pass, the police will ignore the car for a short while, cars normally being towed away only if they actually block traffic and cause bedlam; never as a means to collect revenue as is so common in the West.

This is an aside, but the only country in the world similar to China (to my knowledge) is Italy. In Rome, I once asked a policeman (this is a true story) if I could leave my car in a driveway for a few minutes while I ran across the street to have a quick coffee. He agreed, but asked that I leave my keys in the car in case he had to move it. The driveway was the emergency entrance to a hospital.

In the US, in Canada, and in many European countries, overstaying a visa – by even one day – will give you cause for permanent regret. Normally, you will sit in a jail cell until you have paid your fine and have a paid ticket out of the country, at which point the police will take you to the airport and put you onto the plane, and you will be prohibited from returning for quite some time. I once overstayed my visa in China by about three weeks although in my defense it was due to a misunderstanding that wasn’t my fault, an excuse that would bring me no sympathy in Canada or the US. But going through China’s customs and immigration exit, the officer gave me a stern look and said, “You know, you shouldn’t do that”. It was only then that I realised what had happened, and when he understood the unwitting nature of my transgression and my sincere regret at its occurrence, he let me board my plane free of harm. Once again, he didn’t want to punish me, he didn’t want to start a war; he just wanted me to obey the laws.

Once, for reasons I cannot recall, I filed all my utility bills neatly together in a desk drawer and forgot about them. A month or two later, I found little white notices stuck onto the outside of my front door, which were requests for payment. The management office asked me to leave with them the bills and the cash, and they called the utility companies who sent a courier to pick up the payments. No penalty, no interest, no recriminations, no denial of service. The utility companies didn’t want to punish me; they didn’t want to start a war; they just wanted me to pay my bills. I once arrived home after dinner to discover my house had no electricity. It was merely a breaker that was quickly reset, but at the time I wondered aloud to a friend if perhaps the electricity had been cut off because I’d forgotten to pay my bill, and she said “I’ve never heard of such a thing”.

Westerners are fascinated by the Chinese cultural concept of Guanxi, which Wikipedia tells us “defines the fundamental dynamic in personalized social networks of power, which can be best described as the relationships individuals cultivate with other individuals, and is a crucial system of beliefs in Chinese culture”. Also that Westerners use the term “instead of referring to “connections” and “relationships” as neither of those terms sufficiently reflects the wide cultural implications that Guanxi describes. {1} This is both true and false, proving that Wikipedia doesn’t understand Guanxi any more than do the columnists at The New York Times. We have a saying in the West that “It’s not what you know, but who you know”, the concept of an individual benefitting from friendships and connections being universal and not particular to China.

But in China, friendships and so-called “connections” have a flavor of trust and responsibility that exists nowhere else in the world, at least not to my knowledge. A good friend was purchasing a new house for her parents and wanted to pay the full price in cash with the signing of the contract so as to benefit from an attractive discount. She was $200,000 short and called to ask if I would lend her the money to complete the payment. I agreed without even having to think about it, and transferred the money to her account the same day. If I recall correctly, she gave me an IOU at one point but I have no idea what I did with it, and the loan was repaid. In reverse, when I purchased my last house I wanted to pay the entire amount in cash with the purchase contract for the same reason, but most of my money was sequestered in bank Guaranteed Investment Certificates (GICs) that didn’t mature for several months and I was $35,000 short. I was chatting about my house with another friend and asked if she would lend me the money. We immediately walked across the street to her bank and she gave me the cash, no questions asked.

There is an organic strawberry farm near my home, with the sweetest strawberries I have ever tasted (the most expensive, too). I sometimes would buy a basket as a gift for the girls in the property management office. One day, I locked myself out of my own house, having neglected to leave a set of keys at the office. But a young girl at the office took great pains to find a locksmith, who had to come from another city (forty kilometers distance) to unlock my door. When I discovered I had no cash with which to pay him, the young girl, maybe only twenty years old, negotiated the man’s price down by forty percent and paid him from her own account.

To say that such things wouldn’t occur in the West, even with family, is a huge understatement. In China, they are normal, underpinned by a cultural quality of trust and obligation that cannot be fathomed by someone living in the West. The English language, precise as it is, has no vocabulary to explain the quality of these relationships and the inseparable obligation inherent therein.

One major complaint that corporate executives, especially Americans, express about China is that the Chinese often don’t follow the terms of a contract. From an American point of view they are correct, but that American point of view is as black and white as is their political religion, hence the culture shock. To Americans, the Chinese signing of a contract is only an intermediate stage in a permanent negotiating process whereas it should rightfully form part of the Ten Commandments since it is written in stone. This is easy to understand but it bypasses completely the Western ideological intellect.

I want to use an analogy here, one that compares China to Japan but that applies equally to the West. Japanese chopsticks are tapered to a pointed end and, when the Japanese eat fish, with these chopsticks they can easily first pick out all the bones and then eat the fish. But Chinese chopsticks are not tapered and are typically blunt at the ends. Thus, the Chinese eat the whole fish, and then pick out the bones one by one as they find them. In the West, this is how we view a marriage. We know there will be rocky periods in the future, but we want the marriage and we proceed with the implicit understanding that we will work through those periods as they arise. The Chinese apply the same intent toward business dealings. It isn’t wrong; it’s just different.

One day, when my children were much younger, I arrived at home to find a window broken. I asked what happened and who did it, and one of my sons confessed. But what do you suppose my reaction would have been had my son said, “I refuse to answer on the grounds that I may incriminate myself” or worse, if he had said, “I don’t think you can prove I did it, so I plead not guilty. Give it your best shot.” I am by nature a gentle person, but any kid of mine taking such a position would receive a slap on the head he wouldn’t forget.

And now we come to China’s judicial system, which operates in exactly the same way we raise our children. If you are caught doing something wrong, you confess, you admit to your crime and, if you have some good sense, you apologise, express your regret for what you have done, and throw yourself onto the mercy of your father. It helps immensely if your regrets and apologies are sincere. But, with Chinese police and courts, if you want to be stubborn and arrogant and force the police into a lengthy investigation and the courts into a long trial, you will receive no mercy when found guilty, and no clever lawyer will save you. That is precisely what we teach our children. If a child lies and tries to avoid blame, the punishment will inevitably be more harsh, and that is as it should be. In this sense, the Chinese judicial system is perfect while the Western system is stupidly flawed. In Chinese courts, lawyers are not permitted to lie or to cast unfair aspersions or to attack vulnerable witnesses as they do in the West.

It is the same with the process of plea-bargaining that the Americans are desperately attempting to push onto China as a superior method of dealing with crime. But it is not superior; it is instead an enormous fraud being perpetrated. The problem is that Chinese judges have proven almost impermeable to bribery and Chinese lawyers have not been trained to lie in a courtroom. So what to do when Americans are charged with crimes in China, as they increasingly are and increasingly will be? The benefit of plea-bargaining is that it removes judicial decisions and sentencing from the judges and the courts and turns this discretion over to two sets of lawyers on the hopeful theory that lawyers can be bribed more easily than can judges. Again, in this respect the Chinese system is perfect while it is the Western (American) justice system that is so badly flawed. We need think only of the recent events in the US where Jeffrey Epstein avoided 200 years in prison for his international underage sex trafficking ring, accomplished only by removing decisions as to guilt and punishment from the courts and placing it entirely into the hands of lawyers and money, all done without the benefit of sunlight.

Let’s return for a moment to the Western media. I will begin with John Bussey at The Wall Street Journal who, in one brief article titled, “China: Bullying to Prosperity”, won a Nobel Prize for dishonest and unethical reporting. This was his article in part:


Watching China bully Wal-Mart Stores this week – and watching Wal-Mart prostrate itself under the beating – is an embarrassing reminder of a simple fact: China, the world’s fastest growing major market, has the upper hand with US business. Its array of protectionist barriers, weak rule of law, and siren-like market make events like this all but inevitable. In the company’s stores in the city of Chongqing, nonorganic pork was labeled “organic”. This was the mistake. The pork was otherwise fine. Seizing on this error at a time when inflation is a hot-button issue in China, officials accused Wal-Mart of cheating the public by charging premium prices for regular meat. They fined the company, shut down all thirteen Wal-Marts in the city, and jailed a number of Wal-Mart employees. The actions played well in the national media. There’s little if any recourse in authoritarian China when something like this happens to a US company. There aren’t regular courts. Like many other US firms that have run afoul of nationalist sentiments in China, Wal-Mart could only beg forgiveness. It has nearly 350 stores in China with revenue of $7.5 billion. So Wal-Mart dropped to its knees.


He finished with an astonishing claim where he cleverly quoted a (non-existent) “American executive in Beijing who watches these matters” who supposedly said Wal-Mart had done far more than Chinese companies “to secure the safety of the [country’s] food supply”. {2}

We should all feel sorry for poor baby Wal-Mart, with only $7.5 billion in revenue in China and being forced to “drop to its knees” because “there aren’t regular courts” and “authoritarian” China has “a weak rule of law”. Bad China, no question.

But that’s not exactly how it was. China had had years of trouble with Wal-Mart repeatedly breaking every law on the books. Those same stores had for years been selling ordinary pork labeled as organic, each time being caught and fined a trivial amount, eight times in the prior seven months alone. It was so bad that when the inspectors were leaving the store with the confiscated illegal products, Wal-Mart’s staff were already busy labeling yet more ordinary pork as organic. It was just a game where the retail price was several times higher and the profits so huge that the nuisance of inspectors was trivial. What changed the game was that this last time the inspectors made a wrong turn as they were leaving the store, and found themselves in a refrigerated room with 75,000 kilograms of ordinary pork labeled as organic. And thus was Wal-Mart “securing the safety of China’s food supply”. But according to The Wall Street Journal’s Bussey, a low-level clerk made an innocent “mistake” and mislabeled a few packages of meat, but the mean, authoritarian Chinese government which has no courts and no rule of law, made the company “drop to its knees”.

I can provide dozens of heavily-documented cases where foreign companies, mostly American, have committed the most egregious crimes in China, yet were repeatedly warned rather than being severely punished as they would have been in any Western country. In one case, Coca-Cola was forced to destroy about 100,000 cases of bottled drinks because of an atrociously high level of chlorine which, it was discovered, was poured into the drinks to kill an equally high level of fecal bacteria. In the West, the company’s business license would have been canceled, especially considering the lies the company told, even going on national television to claim their product was “perfectly safe” when it patently was not. It is also worth noting that of the ten largest corporate consumer frauds perpetrated in China in recent years, eight of those were by American companies like P&G, OSI, Nike, GSK, KFC. {3}

In a similar instance, the Western media stridently reported, ad nauseum, that “a Chinese human-rights lawyer” had been imprisoned by “The Communist Party”, ostensibly for being a Chinese human-rights lawyer. Once again, bad China. But once again, that’s not exactly how it was.

It was true that this lawyer had on one or two occasions acted for someone who had a complaint about the system, the story being weaved in the Western Zionist press that he was unjustly tossed into prison for daring to assist a challenge against the “authoritarian, totalitarian, and brutal” “Chinese dictatorship” and, even worse, daring to challenge the shaky position of The Communist Party of China who would exterminate anyone for the sake of maintaining their “feeble grip on power”. In only one article of nearly 100 that I read on this particular case in the Western press, was there even a suggestion of an extenuating circumstance. In only one article, the very last sentence made vague passing mention of “a tax problem”.

That “tax problem” was a bit more than nothing. In China, there are various classifications of purchase receipts, only one of which is usable for corporate expense tax deductions. In many Western countries, even a cash register receipt is usable in this regard, but in China we must have an official receipt containing a government stamp. Since these receipts are equivalent to a tax credit of 25%, they are valuable and are sometimes traded. If I have official tax receipts my company cannot use, I can sell them to you at ten percent of face value and you can save fifteen percent on your corporate income taxes. In this case, this “human-rights lawyer” and four of his friends, all lawyers, had been running a business where they printed counterfeit tax receipts and sold them to unsuspecting businesses, in total more than $300 million worth. All five were arrested and thrown into prison but, according to the Zionist media, this lead lawyer (only) was imprisoned not by the courts, but by “the Communist Party”, and not for a massive counterfeiting fraud but for defending the poor and helpless who were victimised by the vicious communists. When Westerners have only a diet of daily articles like this presented to them by their most trusted media, how is it possible for anyone to accurately understand anything about China?

China is renowned for its low crime rates. Cities like Shanghai and Beijing, along with Tokyo and Singapore, lead the world in almost all aspects of personal safety. I have travelled through almost every part of this country, from the largest cities to rural areas, in daylight and darkest night, alone and with companions, and in fifteen years I can honestly say I have never once had the slightest concern for my personal safety, and in fact the thought had never entered my mind.

In this context of absence of crime, China has bypassed cheques and cards in favor of a universal mobile phone payment system but is still in some ways a cash society, surprisingly still using bills for many large transactions. In any city in China we see on a daily basis people standing in line at an ATM, patiently waiting while one person is feeding huge wads of bills into the machine, 10,000 RMB at a time, the pile of cash often exceeding perhaps $US 50,000. This is such a common transaction as to be completely ignored by everyone. In my fifteen years in China, I have never heard of anyone being robbed at an ATM.

Urban governments in China often expropriate for redevelopment downtown land containing old and dilapidated housing, leading the Western media to decry the “brutal, authoritarian displacement” of citizens, but once again that’s not exactly how it really is. These old homes are not heritage sites but mostly miserable and impoverished one-room hovels sharing a common kitchen and bathroom, where windows and doors leak wind and rain, and lacking both heating and air conditioning. The local governments move an entire small urban community into a suburb where they have built lovely new apartment buildings that are turned over to the people free of charge. The new homes are one or two-bedroom apartments, built to a good standard, with real toilets and bathrooms and kitchens, far nicer than these displaced citizens could ever have hoped for. Anyone who doesn’t want to move, will be paid a cash sum for their old home but, with urban housing being very expensive, accepting the new home is the universal option. In similar fashion, the Chinese national government recently built more than 60,000 new homes in Tibet, given to the people free of charge, to remove them from poverty, put them together in real communities, and help to protect the environment. The Western media unanimously refused to report this.

Further with housing, China’s national and city governments take action to moderate house prices on the dictatorial communist premise that houses are homes to live in, not “assets for speculation and profiteering”. In the very large centers homes are quite expensive, much less so in the suburbs and second and third-tier cities, but even so about ninety percent of all Chinese own their own homes and about eighty percent of these are fully paid. Bank mortgages are uncommon in China although growing to some extent. The Chinese do not like “the feeling” of being in debt and a high savings rate is contained in Chinese DNA, leading to housing down payments of typically forty to fifty percent with the balance being borrowed from the extended family and repaid interest-free over time. China is the only country to my knowledge where a young couple can easily borrow money for a house purchase from aunts, uncles, cousins, grandparents, and pay cash for their first home, and low-income couples are often able to purchase below-cost subsidised housing from the government or, surprisingly, from many State-owned corporations that build low-cost housing from their surplus profits. Socialism at its finest.

On this same note, I wrote in my article on Socialism that in Xi’An there is a school with one of the finest campuses in the world, hectares of green grass, an Olympic-sized swimming pool, flower gardens, lovely condominiums and townhouse residences for the faculty and students. The school was built with surplus profits of a local state-owned tobacco company that wanted to give something to the community. The firm not only built the school but pays the annual operating costs.

Further with housing (and other major purchases), the Chinese do not like the feeling of buying anything that is used, this applying to homes, automobiles, major appliances. If the Chinese purchase a used car, it will be a first car and a maximum of one or two years old, the remainder disappearing into the rural areas as temporary but affordable transportation. If a Chinese buys a used home, their first act is to completely gut the interior, stripping the entire dwelling to bare concrete, and reconstructing the entire home to make it “new”, this renovation simply taken for granted as part of the purchase cost.

Let’s return for a moment to the unpaid utility bills. In the West, utility companies typically cut off electricity or gas immediately on the due date, then charge the homeowner a substantial re-connection fee, a financial penalty, and extra interest on the due amount. This harsh attitude is surprisingly derived from the West’s twisted Christianity where, according to the bankers, you have committed a sin – an offense against God – by failing to pay your bill on time and therefore “deserve” to be punished. The utility company doesn’t cut off your electricity because it needs the money but because it wants to punish you, to make you suffer for your transgression against the god of money. The Chinese, not having been terminally infected with this sacrilegious version of religion, cannot fathom the existence of such an attitude. The West, in their eagerness to destroy China, cannot in turn fathom the concept that “freedom of religion” inherently includes the possibility of freedom FROM religion. But the Chinese do in fact have what we might term a religion (in addition to Buddhism), one that derives from Confucius, and teaches gentleness, forgiveness, and understanding. Confucius taught only reform and education, never punishment, at least not in a civil context. This brings us to the surprising but inescapable conclusion that the Chinese are far better Christians than are the Christians themselves.

This is one reason China, with more people than the US and Europe combined, has only 1/1,000th as many lawyers. The Chinese way is to settle disputes by discussion and negotiation, never by force. This is so true that in many police stations in China, the first room you see when you walk through the door is a “negotiation room” or a “dispute settlement room”. The police will moderate many forms of disputes that can potentially be settled without the filing of criminal charges or civil lawsuits. The American way, and in fact the white man’s way, is to call the police and hire a lawyer, which is why Americans spend more each year on lawyers than they do on the purchase of new automobiles. The Chinese way is better.

This is probably an appropriate place to point out that, aside from the normal border disputes between neighboring nations, all the world’s wars have been initiated by the Christians and Jews, following in the footsteps of their God whose major commandment was “Thou shalt not kill”. In case you don’t know, China has never started a war with anyone, and the country’s last battle was a minor border skirmish about fifty years ago, one that was begun by India not by China.

One indication of the inherent socialist and humanitarian nature of the Chinese people is their attitude to innovation and intellectual property (IP), a powerful point of dispute between China and the capitalist West. In the West, in years past, patents were granted for a period of only three years, enough time for an inventor to either produce or sell his invention, and this only for creations deemed to be socially useful. There was no patent protection for Barbie’s plastic breasts or Apple’s ridiculous “rectangle with rounded corners”.

We can think of it this way: if you tell me a humorous story and I repeat it to another person, you are not offended if I fail to credit you as “the owner” of the joke and in fact you are pleased that my appreciation was sufficient to relate it onward. This is essentially the Chinese position on innovation. They are not offended that you liked a creation so much as to copy it and improve it and, in real life, this flurry of activity from the entire nation that surrounds a new invention produces real creativity and development. Most every new invention is primitive at the outset, requiring much modification and amendment to result in its eventual perfect form. In the absence of the designed hindrances to innovation and competition by the West’s brutal IP laws, the natural Chinese way is to permit a new invention to escape into the national population where potentially millions of people will contribute to the modification and development, resulting not only in an astonishingly rapid evolution of a new product but its free ability to benefit the entire population instead of being jealously restricted to the selfish benefit of one person. This is the reason that China’s IP laws are so much less aggressive than those of the West, especially of the US. The natural, innate, and deep-seated Chinese concern is for the benefit of the nation, of all people, and I worry that China is being corrupted by the vicious greed inherent in Western capitalism evidenced by the country’s “tightening” of its IP legislation.

There is one other item worth noting here, that of the pace of change in China. Western countries required the best part of 100 years to industrialise and move from agrarian societies to urban development, while China managed this in perhaps thirty years, one generation. When young people in China are married today, they want a new house, a new car, and a foreign vacation. When their parents were married, they wanted a bicycle, a radio, and a sewing machine. I have spoken to many Chinese in their early thirties who tell me that when they graduated from university only ten years ago they couldn’t have imagined owning a new home and having a car and taking European vacations only ten years later. Such enormous change inflicted on a society with such speed, naturally creates a great many strains, and it is much to the credit of China’s national government and the extraordinary quality of its leaders that these strains have been managed while maintaining a powerful coherence in Chinese society, the exceptions being mostly minor.

This is so true that consistently in all polls at least 85% and often 95% of the population express great trust in their government and support of its actions. {5} The New York Times ran a recent editorial that must have choked them in the writing, but that grudgingly admitted the Chinese very broadly support their system of government and that it appears to be working very well for them. In an article in The Economist magazine, the writer, in deep shock, bemoaned the fact that “a disconcertingly high percentage of China’s population appear very happy with their government”. A few years ago, the Americans, disbelieving these statistics, attempted to provoke the Chinese people to a “Jasmine revolution”, flooding the Chinese social media with a call to congregate in Wangfujing in downtown Beijing to protest against their “brutal totalitarian government”. Unfortunately for the Americans, the Chinese had no such interest and nobody showed up to protest. The only participant was then-US Ambassador Jon Huntsman who came to view the (non-existent) results of his handiwork, and who was recognised and so ridiculed by the shoppers present that he put his tail between his legs and ran for cover. {6}

However, due to the rapidity of social change, it is possible in China today to see remnants of the prior generation incongruously mixed together with those of the new age. What this means is that your picture of China can be very much colored by your focus. The national government has indeed brought 800 million people out of poverty in a very short time but we can still find pockets of poverty simply because it is not possible to do everything at the same time. So, in a railway station somewhere, we can see in one view the sleekest and fastest fifth-generation 350 Kilometers per hour high-speed trains next to a first-generation fifty kilometers per hour train. When totally different generations coexist simultaneously, we can look at any sector and find evidence to prove whatever point we want to prove. Those who want to disparage China will simply choose a focal point that places the country in an unfavorable light and present that as the basic condition of the entire country.


Larry Romanoff is a retired management consultant and businessman. He has held senior executive positions in international consulting firms, and owned an international import-export business. He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University, presenting case studies in international affairs to senior EMBA classes. Mr Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of ten books generally related to China and the West. He can be contacted at:








Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author{s}. The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article.

Copyright (c) Larry Romanoff, Global Research, 2019

The Total Breakdown of Relations with China …

… Could Throw Our Planet into Utter Turmoil

by Michael Snyder

The Economic Collapse blog (November 20 2019)

Zero Hedge (November 21 2019)

We just witnessed one of the most monumental events of the entire decade, and yet most Americans still don’t understand what has happened.

In recent months, the global economy and stock markets around the world have been buoyed by the hope that the US and China would soon sign a new trade agreement. Unfortunately, there is no way that is going to happen now. On Tuesday, the Senate unanimously passed the “Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act of 2019”, and the House of Representatives passed the same bill by a 417 to 1 vote on Wednesday.

Needless to say, the Chinese are beyond angry that Congress has done this. In Part One of this article, I showed that China is warning the US to “rein in the horse at the edge of the precipice” and that there will be “revenge” if this bill is allowed to become law. And it looks like this bill will actually become law because Bloomberg is reporting that President Trump is fully expected to sign it…


President Donald Trump is expected to sign legislation passed by Congress supporting Hong Kong protesters, setting up a confrontation with China that could imperil a long-awaited trade deal between the world’s two largest economies.


Before I go any further, there is something that I want to address. Earlier today, one of my readers emailed me and accused me of siding with China because I am warning about what will happen if trade negotiations fail. Of course that is not true at all. I have been writing about the horrific human rights abuses in China for many years, and they are one of the most tyrannical regimes on the entire planet today. But our two economies have become deeply intertwined over the past two decades, and there are going to be very serious consequences now that we are rapidly becoming bitter enemies. Anyone that doesn’t see this is simply not being rational.

As I have detailed repeatedly in recent months, the global economy has already entered a very serious slowdown. One of the only things that could reverse our economic momentum in the short-term would be a comprehensive trade agreement between the United States and China. But now that our relationship with China has been destroyed, there isn’t going to be a deal.

Some mainstream news sources are reporting that all of this rancor about Hong Kong could delay a trade deal, but that is just more wishful thinking.

Over in China, they are being much more realistic. In fact, the editor of the Global Times, Hu Xijin, just said that the Chinese are “prepared for the worst-case scenario” …


Few Chinese believe that China and the US can reach a deal soon. Given current poor China policy of the US, people tend to believe the significance of a trade deal, if reached, will be limited. China wants a deal but is prepared for the worst-case scenario, a prolonged trade war.


And he followed that up with another tweet that openly taunted US farmers …


So a friendly reminder to American farmers: Don’t rush to buy more land or get bigger tractors. Wait until a China-US trade deal is truly signed and still valid six months after. It’s safer by then.


As the two largest economies on the entire planet decouple from one another, it is going to cause global economic activity as a whole to dramatically slow down. Corporate revenues will fall, credit markets will start to tighten, and fear will increasingly creep into global financial markets.

I have repeatedly warned that conditions are ideal for our first major crisis since 2008, and this conflict with China could be more than enough to push us over the edge.

And already we are getting more bad economic news day after day. For example, we just learned that US rail traffic this month is way down compared to last year …


Nowhere is the slowdown in the US economy more obvious than in places like Class 8 Heavy Duty Truck orders and rail traffic. We already wrote about how Class 8 orders continued to fall in October and new data the American Association of Railroads (AAR) now shows that last week’s rail traffic and intermodal container usage both plunged.

The AAR reported total carloads for the week ended November 9 came in at 248,905, down 5.1% compared with the same week in 2018. US weekly intermodal volume was 266,364 containers and trailers, down 6.7% compared to 2018, according to Railway Age.


Unless a miracle happens with China, the economic numbers are going to continue to get worse.

Sadly, a miracle seems exceedingly unlikely now. As I pointed out in Part One, the only way that our relationship with China can be fixed is if Congress repeals the bill that it just passed, and there is no way that is going to happen.

And we better hope that our trade war with China doesn’t escalate into a real war at some point.

According to a report that was released earlier this year, we are very ill-prepared to fight any sort of a conventional war with China in the Western Pacific …


The University of Sydney’s United States Studies Centre’s new report Averting Crisis, said: “China’s growing arsenal of accurate long-range missiles poses a major threat to almost all American, allied, and partner bases, airstrips, ports and military installations in the Western Pacific.

“As these facilities could be rendered useless by precision strikes in the opening hours of a conflict, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) missile threat challenges America’s ability to freely operate its forces from forward locations throughout the region.


In addition, US military officials are deeply concerned by how rapidly China has been upgrading their strategic nuclear arsenal. For example, they now possess a “submarine-launched missile capable of obliterating San Francisco” …


China has tested a new submarine-launched missile capable of obliterating San Francisco, an insider has revealed, in a massive boost to the country’s “deterrent”.

The Chinese navy tested its state-of-the-art JL-3 missile in Bohai Bay in the Yellow Sea last month, sources said.

The nuclear-capable missile has a 5,600 mile range, significantly longer than its predecessor the JL-2, which could strike targets 4,350 miles away.


We certainly aren’t at that point yet, but without a doubt the Chinese now consider us to be their primary global enemy.

For the moment, it is just a “cold war” that we are facing, and the Chinese are quite adept at playing global chess. They have lots of ways that they can hurt us, and most Americans don’t realize this.

But in the end, nobody is going to “win” this conflict, and the entire planet is going to suffer.

Collectively, the economies of the United States and China account for approximately forty percent of the GDP of the entire world.

As we cause chaos for one another, everyone else is going to experience tremendous pain as well.

The stage is set for a global nightmare, and at this point, it doesn’t appear that there is a way that we will be able to escape it.

Copyright (c) 2009-2019 Media, LTD

China Summons US Diplomat

Vows to retaliate if Donald Trump signs Hong Kong democracy act into law

* Beijing calls on Washington to ‘stop the act becoming law’ after it is passed by Senate, with the US president retaining the right to sign or veto it

* Support for the bill surges among senators amid a siege at a Hong Kong university campus

by Teddy Ng (Updated November 21 2019)

A protester holds an American flag on Wednesday at Polytechnic University, where anti-government protesters and police are locked in a stand-off. Photo: AP

China summoned a senior United States diplomat on Wednesday as it warned it would retaliate if US President Donald Trump signed the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act into law.

In a statement after the bill was passed by the US Senate, the Chinese foreign ministry said Foreign Vice-Minister Ma Zhaoxu had summoned William Klein, the US embassy’s minister counsellor for political affairs.

“China will take strong opposing measures, and the US has to bear all the consequences”, the statement said.

The Senate passed the bill on Tuesday, an act that could pave the way for diplomatic action and economic sanctions against Hong Kong’s government.

US Senator Marco Rubio said the passage of the bill was an important step in “holding accountable those Chinese and Hong Kong government officials responsible for Hong Kong’s eroding autonomy and human rights violations”.

“The United States Senate sent a clear message to Hongkongers fighting for their long-cherished freedoms: we hear you, we continue to stand with you, and we will not stand idly by as Beijing undermines your autonomy”, Rubio said.

It was the second time China had summoned a US diplomat since anti-government protests in Hong Kong began five months ago, triggered by a now-withdrawn extradition bill that would have allowed the transfer of criminal suspects to mainland China’s opaque legal system.

Stocks fell in Hong Kong on Wednesday as Beijing’s condemnation of the Senate’s move renewed worries about prospects for China-US trade negotiations. The Hang Seng Index fell 0.8 per cent, to 26,889.61, while the China Enterprises Index lost 0.7 per cent, to 10,619.51.

White House informal adviser Michael Pillsbury said the passage of the act “strengthens the range of options for President Trump because he now has to decide how precisely to implement the legislation”.

The American Chamber of Commerce in Hong Kong said it respected the Senate’s decision as “as a renewed expression of America’s fundamental interests in Hong Kong”, but warned of “possible unintended, counterproductive consequences”.

Potential fallout could include harm to the ability of American businesses to “continue exercising a strong positive influence in support of Hong Kong’s traditional core values – in particular the sections addressing export controls and sanctions”, the chamber said.

But other observers and former officials said the US already had other tools it could use.

In June, Robert Forden, deputy chief of mission at the US embassy in Beijing, was summoned by Foreign Vice-Minister Le Yucheng.

Klein was summoned after foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said that any attempt by the US to interfere in China’s internal affairs would be in vain.

“We call on the US side to take a clear look at the situation and take steps to stop the act from becoming a law, and stop meddling in the internal affairs of China and Hong Kong, to avoid setting a fire that would only burn itself”, Geng said.

“If the US sticks to its course, China will surely take forceful measures to resolutely oppose it to safeguard national sovereignty, security, and development interests”.

Geng said the move by the Senate was a serious violation of international law and international relations norms, which China “strongly condemns and opposes”.

The situation facing Hong Kong was not about human rights and democracy, but about stopping violence and restoring order, Geng said.

He said violent acts had jeopardised social order and challenged the “one country, two systems” principle under which Hong Kong retained certain freedoms and a degree of autonomy after its 1997 handover from Britain to China.

The bill’s passage in the Senate came after the House of Representatives passed its version
last month. The Senate also passed the Protect Hong Kong Act, which would prohibit the export of non-lethal crowd control and defence items to Hong Kong.

The House and Senate versions of the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act will need to go to a committee of House and Senate members to be reconciled into one unified bill that will go back to each chamber for final approvals. Trump will then have ten days to sign the bill into law or veto it.

Both versions of the bill would require the US government to produce an annual report, certified by the secretary of state, on whether Hong Kong had retained enough autonomy from Beijing to retain the distinct trading status that protects the city from the tariffs the US imposed on Chinese imports last year.

The bill also calls for sanctions against any individuals or entities deemed to have violated freedoms guaranteed under Hong Kong’s Basic Law, its mini-constitution.

The number of senators co-sponsoring the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act surged on Monday, bringing in Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell and showing the biggest jump since the bill was introduced in June.

The surge followed a stream of reports about a violent stand-off since Sunday between Hong Kong’s police and radical protesters at Polytechnic University.

Many US lawmakers have blamed Beijing and the Hong Kong government for the cycle of violence in recent months that culminated in the university clashes.

The Hong Kong government expressed regret about the passage of the two US acts, saying they were unnecessary and groundless. It said in a statement that the acts would hurt both Hong Kong and US interests.

Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development of Hong Kong Edward Yau Tang-wah criticised what he called an “unwarranted and unnecessary” act for “adding fuel to the fire”.

“I don’t want people to be mistaken: the unwarranted foreign intervention is adding fuel to the fire in Hong Kong”, he said. “I don’t see any possible ways to de-escalate the situation we are having. So I would urge people to refrain from meddling into the already delicate situation.”

Several other Beijing bodies denounced the passage of the bill. Yang Guang, spokesman for the State Council’s Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office, Beijing’s highest policy office on Hong Kong matters, expressed “strong protest and condemnation”.

“Some extreme acts of violence are devastating and horrifying”, Yang said. “These facts clearly prove that the biggest risk facing Hong Kong now is violence, not the issue of ‘human rights’ and ‘democracy’.

“The act by some American politicians has completely mixed up right and wrong, and is a double standard without any principle”.

A statement by the central government’s liaison office in Hong Kong said violent protests in the city should not be tolerated in any civilised society, and it was wrong for US politicians to “beautify their terror acts”.

“We call on the US side to immediately stop the dangerous game of playing with fire and going further down the wrong path, otherwise it will suffer bad consequences”, it said.

The National People’s Congress Foreign Affairs Committee and the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Foreign Affairs Committee also condemned the bill.

More than 1,200 US companies do business in Hong Kong, of which more than 800 are either regional offices or headquarters, attracted by the city’s free market orientation, transparent legal system and well-established rule of law, according to the American Chamber of Commerce in Hong Kong.

Yuan Zheng, a US affairs specialist from the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, said Beijing was unlikely to take strong countermeasures against the US, but said the bill’s passage would bring harm to Hong Kong, complicating the situation in the city.

“Hong Kong citizens – not the Chinese mainland – will bear the brunt of unresolved problems in the city”, Yuan said. “Both Beijing and the Hong Kong government have to rethink their approaches to do better jobs in the future”.


Additional reporting by Robert Delaney, Finbarr Bermingham, Owen Churchill, Denise Tsang, and Kristin Huang