Chapter One: A Heterogeneous Land

‍

1. Uncertainty¹ Created by America

After passing through Tokyo and traversing over the surging waves of the vast Pacific, Flight CA985 landed in San Francisco. Because of flight delays, the airport was crowded with flights arriving from Europe and Japan. The usually spacious baggage pickup area and customs clearance hall was crowded and bustling with people. No matter where they came from there was a sense of excitement about arriving in America.

One flight had probably arrived from France, since many people were speaking French. I lined up to go through customs and waited over an hour; everyone was complaining, like people back in China, about the wait taking too long. Many people think that there are not any lines in the West, so they do not expect to have to wait for such a long time when they arrive in the United States. The customs processing area at the San Francisco Airport was divided into three areas: the first for US citizens, the second for non-US citizens, and the third for new immigrants. The first two entrances on the left were for US citizens; these were not crowded, clearly showing the advantage of being an American. Non-US citizens—the largest number of people arriving—immediately felt inferior.

There were groups of Japanese people at the immigration gate. Nowadays, large numbers of Japanese people travel and do business all over the world, showing the strength of a wealthy country and people. Although many foreigners do not like Japanese people, they cannot help but respect them because of Japan’s economic power. It’s been said that the US government is considering granting Japanese people special treatment because there are so many of them: visa waiver status. Based on statistics, this would improve customs processing times by one-third. But diplomacy requires reciprocity, and the Japanese [government] does not seem willing to grant Americans visa waivers.

One can draw at least two conclusions from the Japanese nation’s development: first, economic strength is the basis for determining a nation’s international status and international image; second, a nation’s international status and international image do not depend on economic strength alone.   

The United States is a very developed society in many respects. Anyone who comes to the US will feel a sort of “future shock.”² [In this situation], one type of person will just think about how they can enjoy being in America; another type of person will ponder why there is an America.

Different people have different answers to the latter question. I asked some friends; one answered: first, [the United States] is extremely rich in resources, and second, it encourages competition among talented people. Another friend added that at least people [feel this way] when they first come to America. I also asked G, a friend studying for a PhD at Stanford. He answered “tradition.”

I think this is the most abstract but also the most valuable explanation. The development of any society is not purely a result of economic factors, nor is it caused by short-term adjustments in behavior. A society developing into the “richest in the world” is definitely not an outcome that can just be forced or manipulated into place by willful human effort. 

So, what forces have driven people in this society to strive for generations [to reach this level of success]? Many specific concepts to explain this have been suggested, such as innovation, work ethic, industriousness, and thrift. But what is most important is whether these forces can become a cultural gene: a tradition. Regardless of the factors that are conducive to social development, if these factors do not become a tradition, they will not become deeply rooted in a society.

It takes the efforts of several generations for factors like this to have an effect on a society. Americans talk constantly about innovation and, in reality, the American tradition [of innovation] is very strong. The Chinese also talk constantly about innovation, but [China’s] tradition [of innovation] has had its ups and downs. Some people say that, to Americans, innovation is not in conflict with tradition; to Americans, tradition and innovation are the same thing, since traditions that exist today were innovations only thirty or fifty years ago. To Chinese people, the idea of innovation is in opposition to tradition, and it is not easy to counteract thousands of years of tradition.       

Nowadays, many people flood to the US, and [this phenomenon] deserves deep reflection. A heated discussion has emerged among Chinese intellectuals recently on the topic of re-evaluating socialism and capitalism.³ The main reason this topic is currently being discussed in China is because socialism has been in place now for several decades but it does not measure up to capitalism in areas like the economy. Is the social development model demonstrated by Marx a hundred and fifty years ago compatible with the historical development of mankind? Can socialism ultimately triumph over capitalism? This is what people are uncertain about. This is like the movie Red Guards of Honghu Lake, which was shown on the Boeing 747 on my flight to the United States.⁴ The Chinese people overturned the “three mountains” of imperialism, feudalism, and bureaucratic capitalism, which had long burdened them, but did this guarantee the development of Chinese society?⁵ What impact do revolutions similar to the Chinese revolution, where rural areas overtook cities as the center [of society] and the rural population became the driving force [in society], have on the development of societies? It is certainly worth considering.   

Today, America’s development, with its economic prosperity, political processes, lifestyle, and international status, has sown a lot of uncertainty in the world. People in developed countries have this fundamental concern: human science and technology and material life have developed up to this stage. Is this [stage] contrary to human nature? Will it cause the depletion of the earth’s resources? Will it ultimately lead to the destruction of mankind? Members of the Club of Rome are deeply concerned about this and have [long voiced concern over this issue].⁶

However, people in developing countries have a completely different set of [questions]: what forces created such an awe-inspiring material civilization? What administrative and intellectual systems created the conditions for this development? Is such an [end-state] the result of chance, or was it a historic inevitability? People begin feeling uncertain about this system, which makes them feel uncertain about their own system. In any case, America  has created this uncertainty.   

By entering the United States, one enters this [state of] uncertainty. Even without going to America you will still succumb to it. It is a strange phenomenon. It is easy to enter a state of uncertainty but hard to get out of it. 

‍

2. Manhattan and Chinatown

The plane landed in New York. After arriving I picked up my luggage. Everyone [from the flight] had gone, but there was still no trace of the friend who had agreed to pick me up so I was really nervous. I’d heard from a friend that it might be a bit scary when you arrive in New York, [since] the crime rate is extremely high. I feared I would run into criminals and was really uneasy. Half an hour later my friend arrived—I was so relieved.

We left the airport and went directly to the United Nations [headquarters]. The architecture was imposing and stately. We went to the Security Council [meeting venue] and took pictures. We went to the UN General Assembly meeting venue, found the seat of the Chinese UN Representative, sat in it and took a photo. We also took a photo of each of us giving a speech at the UN podium. While we were visiting the UN we saw the beautiful and valuable gifts from different countries, like ivory sculptures from China, royal ships from Thailand, and drawings from the Soviet Union. These gifts show that citizens of this world all want to [be respected] in the UN, but how many countries actually believe in the principles of the UN? It seems like everyone wants to join and show their love for it, but in reality, they constantly violate [what it stands for].

In today’s world, where there are diverse interests, strict ideological boundaries, and conflicts of all kinds constantly emerging, the UN has not served the purpose that it should serve. However, the UN still plays a role that cannot be underestimated, especially in the areas of socioeconomic and cultural development. With respect to [resolving] conflicts, the Iran-Iraq ceasefire is an outstanding example.

Today’s world is a world that still requires [conscious] human control. Looking at the statue in front of the UN building, where swords are turned into plowshares, I thought about what methods people should use [to resolve conflicts]. History shows that many people believe war is necessary, which results in swords being used as swords, not as plowshares. 

The atmosphere was familiar In New York’s Chinatown. It seemed a bit more rundown than other areas. It is said that Chinatown is a complex area and that it has everything to give it a characteristically Chinese appearance. It makes people think of Bo Yang’s The Ugly Chinese.⁷ I didn’t [spend much time] in Chinatown, but [from what I have seen] there are a lot of small businesses. Gazing at signs with Chinese characters on them over the streets in this bustling area reminds one of far-away China. This area stands in stark contrast to the rest of Manhattan. One place brings to mind Chinese culture; the other  informs one about Western culture.    

The United States and China are an eternal topic of conversation for nearly all Chinese scholars and foreign students in America. There are two eternal centers to this eternal topic: economic development and political democracy. The economic achievements and technological progress made by the US in this century are obvious to all; today no country in the world can surpass them. The Japanese are overbearing, fierce, and ascendant, but with the exception of their economic competitiveness they still cannot compare to the US in areas like military [power], culture, and natural resources. 

What needs to be analyzed is the role that America’s economic development has played in its political development. The United States holds the world’s attention in these two areas, whereas China is too lacking in them. Therefore, these two areas have become eternal topics in the modernization process. How can China’s economic modernization be realized? The most fundamental question is, can the process of economic modernization be achieved under public [state] ownership? Most developed countries in the world today do not have public [state] ownership. This reality poses the largest [intellectual] challenge to people.

Second, how does political democracy develop? Does it happen along with economic [modernization] or out of sync with it? These two major subjects have become hot topics of discussion this year.    

One argument is that economic modernization cannot be achieved without political democracy. The cases of Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore and South Korea refute this, as they did not have political democracy when their economies really took off. Hong Kong was under colonial rule, Taiwan was under a one-party dictatorship, and South Korea was run by the military.  Another argument is that economic development will [create] the conditions for political democracy, an example being the democratization movements in newly-industrializing regions and countries. The counterargument to this is also very strong: after developed Western nations went through the bourgeois revolution, their economies were still not considered developed. Their economies were far from comparable to the economic strength of some of today’s developing countries, but the foundations for democratic systems were still established. 

This issue is probably something that theoretical circles in China should [focus on]. Economic development is just a phenomenon; centralization or democracy may spur or inhibit economic development, but the central concern needs to be whether the social changes that occur during the process of economic development are advantageous for the development of political democracy.

Without economic development, developing countries will have to depend on developed countries economically—primarily in areas like technology, equipment, and precision instrumentation. However, the different development stages of each country also have to be considered. For example, African countries primarily need food to sustain basic living conditions. Regardless of what their needs are, the result is the formation of a special exchange mechanism: developing countries need to use their best products in [market] exchanges with developed countries. As a result, people in developing countries have no way to partake in the best products produced in their own countries, or even the second-best products, as these products are consumed by foreigners who come to these developing countries.     

The US market has products from every country and region in the world, including China, Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, Jamaica, and Mexico. The best products from all countries and regions in the world [are drawn to] the US market in exchange for US dollars. Since everyone wants US dollars there is intense competition, so product quality is very high and prices are very low. This situation has created the unprecedented prosperity of the US market. This is the result of market mechanisms as well as a benefit the United States has enjoyed since the US dollar’s international status [as a global reserve currency] was determined at the Bretton Woods Conference after World War II.⁸ Of course, many foreign products have entered the United States and have challenged American domestic industries, causing factory closures and unemployment—this cannot be ignored. Therefore, the two major forces of free trade and protectionism are always at odds.

‍

3. “The Four Cs”

After living in the United States for just a short time, I’ve [observed that there are] several things that are particularly ubiquitous in American society. By looking at this outer veneer, one can discover some fundamental characteristics of the societal dynamics operating in the United States. Four are discussed [below]: 

1. Many Cars – there are always clusters of cars driving in large and small cities, on highways and rural roads. Cars come in all shapes, sizes, and models.

When I was in Washington, Antony King, the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Essex in the UK, pointed to the various cars in the street and said to me: “Ten years ago, most of the cars I saw in the United States were made in the United States. Nowadays, there are all kinds of cars, especially Japanese cars.” The car war between the United States and Japan is [well underway]. Japanese cars have made such inroads in the American market primarily because of how large the American car market is and how important cars are to individual lives.

In the United States not having a car is like not having legs. The highway system is very well-developed, usually with three lanes on the left and the right. The lanes are divided by speed—fast, medium, and slow—and in some places there are seven lanes on both the left and right. All kinds of cars are driving day and night. Most families have a car, and many families have more than one. At Stanford University I once went to a professor’s house and [saw] there were three cars. The United States is one of the very few countries in the world with such a large number of privately-owned cars.   

2. Many Calls – In the United States there are phones everywhere you go. All offices and homes have phones. Some households even have several phones. All public spaces have [pay] phones where you can make calls by putting in a certain number of coins. Now there are also phone cards—all you have to do to make a call is insert the card into the phone. In airports there are rows of pay phones; there are also pay phones in hotels. When I was in Washington I stayed at the Sheraton and Hilton hotels, and each hotel had rows of pay phones in the lobby. Universities also have pay phones in public areas like libraries, dining halls, conference venues, computer centers, and language centers.

Not only are phones everywhere, but they’re also efficient and convenient; [the connection] is always very fast, regardless of where you are calling. To make domestic long-distance calls, you just pick up the phone and dial—you can get through in half a minute at most. Calling anywhere in the world is easy, you just pick up the phone and dial. Using the telephone is a big part of everyday life, including dating and falling in love. Many [American] parents told me that their sons and daughters make calls to their sweethearts that sometimes last for two hours; they monopolize the phone line so no other calls can come in, and it costs a lot of money.  Naturally a society with a well-developed telephone system [wouldn’t necessarily have this problem]—you can use phones for romance or to talk about other things.         

3.  Many Computers – the large number of computers is another major characteristic [of American society]. No matter where you go, you will see people using computers. When I visited the National Security Council, I noticed that everyone there used computers. College professors have computers in their offices or at home. At hotels the entire management system is computerized. Drivers licenses issued by the Department of Transportation [sic] must be entered into a computer. Payments in stores and restaurants are computerized. Records retrieval in libraries is computerized. The system for depositing money in a bank is computerized. Factory production, government offices, military operations, flights, etc. all use computers extensively.

Computers make everything fast, accurate, and easy to reference. Computers can also be integrated into national or international networks. When I visited the Yale University library, Mr. Ma, [the librarian] responsible for East Asia, typed in my name and within seconds found two of my books—National Sovereignty and Comparative Political Analysis—[in the holdings of] two other universities. Computers can talk to each other; as long as you know the other party’s computer number (Bignet ID) [sic], you can send content to the other party.

4. Many Cards – these “cards” are by no means the same sort of “cards” we have in China. Many cards have been used in China, like the [ration stamps] used for coal briquettes, eggs, daily consumer goods, vegetables, and so forth, which are all made of paper. The cards [in the US] are plastic with a tape-like strip on the back that can store information. There are countless such cards, like credit cards, cards for withdrawing cash, library cards, phone cards, identity cards, and so on. There are many different types of each sort of card.

New cards are still coming out; [for example], the newspaper [had an advertisement] about a new service offered by an airline—if you purchased a certain type of ticket then you could get first class [services] for free. This voucher is [an example] of this type of card. When I flew United Airlines from San Francisco to Iowa, the ticket was actually a card similar to this.

Cards and computer systems are linked; just by inserting the card into a computer you can do all kinds of things, like withdrawing money, depositing money, and checking bank balances. You can use a card and computer to handle these things and do not need to find a bank teller. When most working people take out their wallets there are a lot of cards in them. Wallets have even changed because there are so many cards—they now have several pockets specifically for holding cards. The wallets currently being made in China probably cannot be exported to the US or other Western countries since they do not have places to put cards.    

The above [items] constitute the “four Cs.” The important thing is the role [these items] play in social organization and management:

1. Having so many cars makes the entire society a dynamic whole, with vehicles [enabling] not just the movement of people and objects, but of ideas and energy. 
2. With phones everywhere, the entire society forms a system of information extending in all directions, and with the transmission of words comes the transmission of emotions and information.
3.   Having computers everywhere [facilitates] highly integrated social management, and computerized information is an impartial form of management.
4.   Having so many cards allows for the symbolization of social management, liberating people from the management of physical objects (people and things) and shifting to the management of symbols.

The development of the aforementioned four areas is crucial to a society, and constitutes a driving force and channel for political socialization and political communication. Progress in these areas makes a society’s systems, principles, and vitality increasingly rooted in the hearts of its people, increasingly realized in the material world, and increasingly solid.

These “Four Cs” have also brought many problems. Modernization has costs for humanity and nature.

• Cars everywhere bring more pollution, more traffic accidents, and more waste.
• Phones everywhere bring more disruptions and more eavesdropping.
• Computers everywhere make society’s communication mechanisms more fragile. If a machine fails or a “virus” infects a computer, it will immediately have a widespread impact and sometimes a large quantity of data will be lost.
• Cards everywhere bring more theft, more losses, and more forgeries and related crimes. 

‍

How a society solidifies its institutions is a major issue. It is difficult to have solidified institutions if the institutions are [grounded] only in themselves. Only when the institutions are integrated into people’s lives can they be truly solidified.

‍

‍

1. The word yíhuò [疑惑] has a wider semantic range in Chinese than in English and it can mean “puzzle,” “question,” and “doubt” in addition to “uncertainty.” Thus this title could alternatively be translated as “the puzzle posed by America.” Likewise, our translation of the following passage ( “people begin feeling uncertain [疑惑] about this system, which makes them feel uncertain [疑惑] about their own system. In any case, America  has created this uncertainty  [疑惑] ”) could be alternatively translated as “people begin by feeling puzzled  [疑惑]  by  this system, which makes them puzzled  [疑惑]  by their own system. In any case, America has created this sense of puzzlement  [疑惑].”

2. The phrase “future shock” derives from the Chinese translation of a 1970 book of the same name that was written by American futurist Alvin Toffler. One of Toffler’s main theses is that the modern human feel increasing psychological unease because of the rapid technological changes that occur over his life. Both Future Shock and Toffler’s subsequent book,The Third Wave, gained widespread recognition in China, with Chinese premier Zhao Ziyang using Toffler’s arguments to justify party policy on scientific development. For a detailed discussion of Toffler’s reception in China and his influence on Chinese policy-making, see Julian Gewirtz, “The Futurists of Beijing: Alvin Toffler, Zhao Ziyang, and China’s ‘New Technological Revolution,’ 1979-91,” The Journal of Asian Studies 78, No. 1 (February 2019): 115-140. 

3. A heated debate on the merits and meaning of socialism and capitalism rocked the Chinese intellectual sphere in the 1980s as reformers sought to chart a new path for China’s future. For a longer discussion of these debates see Julian Gewirtz, Never Turn Back: China and the Forbidden History of the 1980s (Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2022) and Yan Sun, The Chinese Reassessment of Socialism, 1976-1992 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995).  

4. The Red Guards of Honghu Lake is a 1961 film adapted from a modern Chinese opera, which in turn is loosely based on events that occurred in the CPC’s Honghu Base Area in the 1930s.

5. At the time of the PRC’s founding in 1949, Chairman Mao Zedong described imperialism, feudalism, and bureaucratic capitalism as the “three mountains” oppressing the Chinese people. The goal of the Chinese Communist Party was thus to liberate them. Mao originally used this analogy in the concluding speech at the Seventh National People’s Congress in June 1945. Alluding to the  ancient Chinese fable that told the story of a foolish old man who touched God’s heart with his determination to remove a mountain one bucket at a time, Mao said that “Today, two big mountains lie like a dead weight on the Chinese people. One is imperialism, the other is feudalism. The Chinese Communist Party has long made up its mind to dig them up. We must persevere and work unceasingly, and we, too, will touch God's heart.” Mao Zedong, “The Foolish Old Man who Removed the Mountains,” Selected Works of Mao Zedong, 11 June 1945.

6. Founded in 1968, the Club of Rome is an association of intellectuals and business leaders committed to the critical discussion of global issues, with a special focus on resource use and sustainability.  In 1972, the Club commissioned a report titled Limits to Growth that predicted, by means of computer simulation, that a sudden decline in both human population and industrial capacity was inevitable as humanity depleted natural stocks of  non-reusable resources like oil. The report received considerable attention in China and was a factor in the adoption of the one child policy in 1979. Susan Greenhalgh, “Missile Science, Population Science: The Origins of China’s One-Child Policy,” The China Quarterly, no. 182 (2005): 253–76.

7. The Ugly Chinese (1985) is a collection of lectures and essays written by Taiwanese novelist and philosopher Bo Yang. In these essays, Bo Yang engages in an extensive critique of Chinese culture, attributing various social ills at the time to fundamental cultural flaws that Bo believed typified the Chinese tradition, such as a tendency to fight amongst themselves and an inherent slavishness. The book gained instant popularity in Taiwan and Japan. It created huge fanfare when it was published in mainland China in 1986, but was subsequently banned in 1987. When Wang Huning published America Against America, Bo’s work was still banned in mainland China. 

8. Held in 1944 in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire in 1944, the Bretton Woods Conference gathered representatives from England and the United States to hammer out new rules to govern the international monetary and financial order after the conclusion of Second World War. 

‍