I had two conversations within the span of two days
One was with a Chinese friend, who was sharing about their perspectives living in US, which she found to be more messy, chaotic, combative, and less efficient, she shared how they think it’s different how they focus on the individual more (which can hinder the overall efficiency and results of the group), rather than the more pragmatic and practical.
Another conversation with someone from the US who couldn’t understand the need in China for facial recognition to enter buildings, and how they found it creepy.
I tried to explain to them that most Chinese people don’t share those concerns, they see the state as an extension of the family, and are more concerned with efficiency, harmony, social responsibility and how well things actually work and are more welcoming of the use of technology for security and efficiency.
It’s true that the perspectives on AI now is quite different. China is embracing AI while it is more divisive in the west.
The key difference between the two conversations was that the Chinese person described it as being more centralist and efficient and the other described it as being authoritarian.
But this is more about values and perspective than about reality.
Often, what you say about the world says more about you
than it does about the world.
And in terms of cultures - the stories we tell, becomes the reality.
I explored this topic more in the article on clear thinking.
Collectivism Vs Individualism
In China harmony, and social responsibility are more important.
I am from Britain, with British, Scottish, Welsh, and Irish ancestors and consider myself to be quite individualistic naturally.
I have lived in China for over 12 years and so I believe I understand how both sides think.
This has led me to see the limitations of too much individualism, and the benefits of combining them and how to combine them well.
I was in China during one of the most fascinating times in history. It is probably one of the periods of fastest wealth creation and human development in the history of the world.
There is a significant information and understanding gap in the west because many people have got their information about China from social media or other forms of media.
News and media tends to be more divisive and polarizing - thats what gets more attention and drives virality and money for media.
I believe the simplistic narrative about China that we have in the west, is used more as a tool, to unite people against a common enemy.
But it’s important to rise above that to seek a deeper, more nuanced, accurate understanding.
It’s less polarising, attracts fewer views, but it’s important to seek to understand China and how they think and that seeking to do so can improve the world.
Why is China how it is? Why is there this difference?
You can explain Chinese culture in a number of ways, looking at confucianism, cultural reasons, but I think a lot of the difference comes from geography and looking into the history of China and how it has developed.
I believe we are very much a product of our environment.
And China is effectively a large self-sufficient river basin of three rivers which is protected by the himalayas, and has been self-sufficient off or more isolated from the world for much of its history, and this has lead to the unique aspects of Chinese culture.
Whereas Europe is quite different. It’s effectively a collection of small-easily protected areas.
This difference has lead to different ways of thinking:
Almost like many small cups, vs one large basin.
As an island the UK has been quite insulated from the perpetual threat of a better-organised mass.
The geography of Europe itself is divided by peninsulas, mountains, rivers.
This has enabled different groups of people to survive and thrive and develop their own cultures.
Our history is one of individual rights, personal identity and liberty.
Greece itself, a collection of city states, created a new form of governance that took each city into account.
And for Europe, our most prosperous times were those of greatest competition.
The renaissance, the industrial revolution.
Throughout history, extreme inter state and city state rivalry and competition encouraged individual risk-taking and innovation.
Despite repeated attempts, the European continent has never successfully been united.
And the lessons of history of Britain and Europe lead to certain conclusions.
Individualism.
But China’s geography is very different.
With its massive agricultural plains and huge river systems like the Yellow and Yangtze rivers it needs centralized control.
Looking through China’s history, the most prosperous times of China’s history were those of unity, and centralised control.
The Song, Han, Tang, Ming dynasties.
Because China’s geography is fundamentally different.
You need someone to centrally manage water resources to reap the benefits of irrigation, protection, and flood control.
Because it’s all one system.
You need to control the whole river to be secure.
It’s like how a railway is a natural monopoly.
And if there is disagreement then the whole system breaks down.
The same thing happened in China time and time again.
The Warring States Period (475–221 BCE)
The Three Kingdoms & The Period of Disunity (220–589 CE)
The Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms Period (907–960 CE)
The Late Qing Dynasty & The Warlord Era (1839–1928)
The optimum solution is to be united and part of the whole system.
And reading the history of both, the lessons of history in China and Europe are fundamentally different and lead to different conclusions.
I think it’s important to understand what are the underlying instincts and where they come from.
Our instincts for individualism and seeing others as competition, and China’s for centralisation and harmony.
Of course, there is more to this:
- China has a great deal of diversity.
- The West is not totally individualistic, the best companies in the west are not run purely by committee.
- The west sees a great deal of collectivism in sports teams, families and so on.
- Culture is always changing
Neither is better, each has their advantages and disadvantages.
But I believe that if we seek to understand China more accurately, it can lead to a better world: “when two cultures collide” or we seek to understand together and our perspectives to create a new kind of synthesis.
Understanding is the first step in bridging any gap.
First seek to understand, then seek to be understood.
I’ll leave with a quote from Lee Kuan Yew
“To understand China and what it will be like in 20 years’ time, you have to know what sort of people and society they are. For 5,000 years, the Chinese have believed that the country is safe only when the centre is strong. A weak centre means confusion and chaos. A strong centre leads to a peaceful and prosperous China. Every Chinese understands that. It is their cardinal principle, drawn from deep-seated historical lessons. There will not be a deviation from this principle any time soon. It is a mindset that predates communism. It has existed for centuries, for millennia.”
Lee Kuan Yew
Lee Kuan Yew, educated in Britain, of Chinese descent, played a key role in the development of Singapore and also served as a model and inspiration for China’s opening up - Deng Xiaoping’s visit to China profoundly influenced China’s reform and opening up policy.
I explored his book, which I highly recommend, and remains even more relevant today, in this video.
You might ask- What about the US? It’s geography is different as a centralised system? Yes but it was founded on the European principles of individualism.
You might ask - What about the European Union? There have been many attempts to unite the continent before with Napoleon and Hitler. The success of the union depends on its ability to manage multiple cultures and languages and systems, and Brexit proves my point.
You might ask - What about the united Roman empire? This also proves my point. It was highly centralised at a time when the mediterranean provided huge benefits as a center for transport and trade. Those things changed.
These things are always changing, I believe with the rise of technology, and as our world becomes smaller, and more interconnected, our environment and geography is effectively changing.
Rivers and mountains are becoming less important in shaping how we communicate and travel and who we become, while they do shape our inherent instincts.
As technology collapses geography, the old instincts may be becoming maladaptive for everyone.
As in many things.
The point is to rise to a higher level view, rather than within, where it is invisible.
To be having a higher level of public understanding, openness and debate and discussion the kind of governance, organisation and culture likely to be most successful in this era, and how best to arrange ourselves and therefore the kind of culture we want to create.
______________________________________________________
Further reading
Interestingly the same principles apply to business - Michael Porter’s Five Forces - the shape of an industry determines what kind of firm wins in it.
Coase's theory of the firm - the optimal size and shape of a firm depends on the transaction costs of its environment
Reading Chinese history is fascinating
Patricia Buckley Ebrey, The Cambridge Illustrated History of China
Jonathan Spence, The Search for Modern China
Studying about China gives you access to a parallel reality - Introducing: Study in China with China Admissions.
And also studying in multiple countries and cultures gives you the advantages of understanding and using the ideas of competition.