#China: Deglobalization, discrimination and openness

china

My recent piece of work on de-globalization and China-WTO issues was published by #China Daily and #EUReporter. I very soon received lots of feedback either favouring globalization or against Chinese social-economic-political directions and presence on its fake presence of openness, non-discrimination, and equality, writes Ying Zhang, Associate Dean & Associate Professor on Entrepreneurship at Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University.

Ying Zhang, Associate Dean & Associate Professor on Entrepreneurship at Rotterdam School of Management

Ying Zhang, Associate Dean & Associate Professor on Entrepreneurship at Rotterdam School of Management

The opponents’ opinions are strong but I am actually very pleased to see China became the centre of (in)tangible discussion and transaction. It shows how important and of attention attraction that China has generated, which might be ironically at the similar level of attraction to all issues emerged after Trump Victory and Brexit. It looks like we won’t be bored in this century to experience tremendous transitions and changes. But prior to looking at my publication on China Daily, I want to kindly send some messages to those who do not know or understand China phenomena very well (including history, institutional, economic, and social norms etc.). The message is as follows.

“The western world and some correspondent media, most of the time, didn’t ethically reflect what a real China was and is, regardless being able to understand a seemingly-complicated Chinese phenomenon and even its beyond. It is disappointing to see many opinions from the west were led by some media, so that citizens, politicians, and decision-makers towards what has happened about China’s (non) market status in terms of WTO regulations, were sadly misled. Even so, I still believe that we should give a shot of understanding to those opinions, especially to those who are short-sighted to comment what has been happening. As a deep believer of Buddhism and Taoism from which most of Chinese were born with and raised up, discrimination and closeness are not the base of our value, in contrast we holding the value of connectedness and collectivism, cooperation, and spirit of being tolerate of differences, etc. Chinese was not cultivated by others to judge using their own value system. Neither do our fellows from the west, I believe. However, the surface of the reality does not echo so. What was the reason there? How come we people can share the same fundamental belief in bringing the best prosperity to our people but at institutional level growing apart?

We must admit that the majority of people from the west have no enough window to completely see what China is and where China has been, which generated a big contrast to the extent to which Chinese has seen and understood the west. With such, impatiently shouting out discriminative judgement with inevitable bias from some of the western countries to China is morally not correct, simply we understand it on the law of the nature. I do see lots of parties raised the issues of freedom, equality, and openness as a “weapon” to judge Chinese performance, and irrelevantly against China’s role and contribution to the globalization and the world prosperity. They did look around, but they did not see through. So how come they can understand the sacrifice and cost that China has paid on behalf of those most developed countries to “the lord of this planet”. At times, those biased attitudes and opinions have been too extremely strong and shallow!

“I want to put in this way as to those so-called discrimination: We are born differently and developed differently but honoured to co-exist in the same planet with certain rules! We’d better to respect rules and conserve and continue developing positive energy to improve our system for the sake of this planet’s well-being. The mentality and behaviour of those wrongly using and supporting so called anti-discrimination and inequality concept by some should open eyes and stand beyond in order to review the antecedents and consequences of existing real discrimination and inequality across countries. Discrimination does come from inequality, and it should be prioritized to be discussed at a global level: why some countries/people are chosen to make rules and some countries/people are chosen to be badly or unfairly treated? why some countries / people are arrogant to design the order to others on what they want? however some must follow? For domestic / private issues of a country or a person, we should learn to respect and leave themselves to deal with, especially learn to ethically not to judge by forcibly applying own cognitive and value system to others. Neither you or I dare to do so.

“China of 1,500 years ago, was in Tang Dynasty and that era was the most prosperous one as the largest economic and civilization contributor to the world. Openness to the world, variety embracing, and collaboration were default values, similar to what the USA had done in the past 300 years and EU to agree to cherish at their setup. Discrimination was heavily dismissed in such an institution. Countries by then with China in trade relationship were well-treated, not only as friends, partners, but also as family members, in order to honorarily seek for prosperity together and fight evil thoughts together. However, in China’s Qing dynasty back to 300 years ago, anti-globalization and protectionism dominated and it bloodily dragged the wealthy dragon back to a nothing and as a nobody. People there were extremely poor without status and identity, country was robbed badly without dignity. The story from our shared history is cruel and true. It does clearly mirror and accurately predict! If it will be as it had been on the function of the history, the only variables for us to consider is the time and mindset…. so, what will it be if deglobalization? If it is clear to us, then the question from such should be how shall we together take another serious thought to revolute our value, mind, behaviour to be more responsible and moral, and how to create a virtuous path for the best of us in the future?

“The consequences are here. The transition just started!”

 

Comments

Facebook comments

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Category: A Frontpage, China, Economy, EU, Eurozone, Politics, Trade agreements, Universities

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *