It sounds like an incredible book. I will certainly check it out. It fits well with my experience of China well - a place where Guanxi (關係）trumps all else. People fear it, hate it, but also aspire it. It's also interesting that how unlikely this book is. I've been in the West for more than 20 years, but I don't plan on speaking ill of China at all. Kudos to the author.
Another book that I really enjoy that seem to be of the same ilk: confession of an economic hitman
I also want to add the book is currently has 20 ratings on Amazon and 4.9 stars - I'm curious if a large flood of of negative reviews quickly get posted haha, since it is now on both the Economist and Hackernews, which I think China closely monitors.
I live in Hong Kong. Many media outlets are closed monitored and relentlessly attacked with fake comments by the state apparatchiks. It's easy to spot, given:
1) Pervasive use of whataboutism;
2) Similar arguments in all comments, with a change or two in order or synonymous;
3) Use of Mandarin idioms translated to English, like "double confirm";
4) Use of Mandarin sentence order translated to English, like "The USA last year in February in Afghanistan did ...".
It's become a bit of game for me. I wish I enough knowledge of NLP to make this into a model and open source it as a wumao detector.
I suspect the Economist has far broader readership and influence than HN, but I like the idea of him browsing these threads like the rest of us.
(President Xi, if you’re reading I’d love to see a comment from you as a “long-time lurker”. Or, even better, wow us by announcing an AI advancement here with a “Show HN” post.)
I am not sure the comparison to Confessions of an Economic Hitman are positive. To me, that book was such unsubstantiated garbage that I left it in the airport where I bought it. It didn’t even make it to the plane.
> It's also interesting that how unlikely this book is.
"No Wall Too High" by Xu Hongci is another unlikely excellent story of a man escaping from communist China. He's imprisoned multiple times and ends up escaping to eventually marry a woman from Mongolia. Then in the Deng era he settles again in Shanghai and publishes his story in Chinese. Later this manuscript was discovered via his surviving wife, translated to English and published in 2017.
Since China is a low-trust society, networking is far more important than in high-trust societies like most of the West (or Japan, for that matter).
This is not unique to China, of course, but it does mean business, politics and even seemingly mundane things like healthcare and schools operate quite differently to what you might expect.
Yep, this is exactly it.
It's not that networking is unique, is that such connection is often used to replace things like law, justice, or a simple queue.
In my own experience, where I went to kindergarten was an outcome of who my grandma knew. Similarly, when I was sick and needed to see a doctor, I had to know someone who knew someone...
Yes - it's similar in the west. But to say they're the same would be like saying 100M dash and marathon is the same sport.
This is so incredibly obvious it’s amazing that anyone would think otherwise.
Say what you want about western government but I’d much rather anger the US government as a US citizen than anger the Chinese government as a Chinese citizen. In China I’d be extremely concerned about my family arrested, arbitrary trials, forced medication with debilitating drugs, bullet in my head, etc.
In America we may let the Sacklers buy their way out of prison but I prefer this to the fear, violence, illegitimacy, and madness of communism. You don’t appreciate the rule of law and equal justice until you are on the wrong side of power.
In America we have people like Snowden, and other political prisoners like Ross Ulbricht. However reasonable people can debate about what they did. I would say both deserve to be free.
In China the rule is Snowden. Everyone becomes Snowden if you speak any truth whatsoever to power.
Does that distinction speak for the liberal charity of Western governments, or the utter uselessness of most dissent? Maybe the feds are chill with our social media posts and placard waggling because they know nothing will come out of it. But see how quickly they move when they're compelled to.
Saying stuff on social media is not relevant to society. The only things relevant to society are groups of people. If you have millions of Twitter followers then saying something online matters because you can influence a large group.
If your ideas start a movement and those people vote, then politicians will listen. You could also hire lobbyists and use financial resources to influence. The point is ideas without influence might as well never have existed.
In China however they police and censor even individual social media posts, let alone allow influencers to gain millions of followers if they disagree with government policy. This is a deeply paranoid and illegitimate government that uses fear and violence to get its way. Very different from western democracy.
And thankfully we can! Is this to imply that an Edward Snowden, similar in all the relevant aspects but for being a Chinese national, would fare better under their sinofascist regime?
I'd much rather get the opinion of the Hong Kong journalists that were detained by the CCP, or any of the millions in detainment camps- whose "crime" was religious or ethnic affiliation!
Why do you think loyalty is too high? I would have guessed just from the sheer number of people working in gov, there are probably dozens of resentful people of not hundreds/thousands.
This is what totally amazes me. Sure you are unlikely to get bullet in the head if you piss off US Government or one of their agencies. But many other options are open.
Government can completely ruin your life if they want to, especially if you are not rich and well connected. Why instead of being concerned with what is wrong in your own backyard would you console yourself that it is worse in China. You just play to the politicians who want to take your attention away from their own fuck ups by feeding you stories about what is happening elsewhere.
Personally I am way more concerned about totally fucked up things in my own country. For example things Civil Forfeiture laws (I am Canadian but when US sneezes we catch the cold). Or when Canada champions human rights by being about the only western democratic country in the world that allows indefinite detention of a person in max security prison without said person having committed or charged with any crime. Or our so called justice system in general when those who have money can have bail and decent defense while poor often lavish in detention and have to take plea deals. etc. etc.
I agree with all those things. I am a libertarian and am deeply concerned about a lot of things. But at the core, western democracy is about freedom and it can be reformed. We have base principles that can be applied logically and appealed to rhetorically.
In China there is no logic, just corruption, power, and great men who tell those beneath them what to do unquestioningly. Many countries are like this - most countries - but only one authoritarian country is a superpower that could perhaps rival the US.
>In America we may let the Sacklers buy their way out of prison
Did they actually do that, or were that just sufficiently careful so that they can't be held criminally responsible? AFAIK the company itself was convicted. While it sucks in the public eye that they weren't convicted, I'm not sure whether holding kangaroo court and/or bill of attainer to punish them (ie. "we can't really technically convict them but we can all agree they're baddies so it's okay to punish them anyways") is any better.
I was simplifying a very complex process. One way to look at it is the Sacklers had a $15 billion fortune and they threatened to burn all of it fighting for decades in court. Alternatively they offered $5 billion to settle and prevent civil lawsuits, retaining 2/3 of their fortune.
The calculus for politicians is to take the quick win and the cash, or let someone else 30 years later get the victory while potentially taking heat now.
Whatever happened I still prefer this system to the “you said something that made me angry, 20 years hard labor followed by execution for you!” style of justice.
I read this book, it was truly jaw dropping to see the "Guanxi" system at work.
From what I could tell, there is a whole system of unwritten rules about how different political factions could collect their "percentage", how these factions compete with each other and eliminate each other and so on.
In a way, it is efficient because everyone who matters (i.e. princelings who control the CCP) has an incentive to "play the game". It is efficient because there are no nasty courts to slow you down, you don't have to deal with the lowest bidder nonsense - it all comes down to connections. The party credibility and the need hold power serves as a very powerful check on the system to prevent the system from becoming too blatantly corrupt and keeps the system going.
But if you aren't someone who matters - i.e. a princeling, you will be forever on the outside looking in.
I have Russian colleagues who I asked about Navalny they had the same view as on him (despite how much they dislike Putin). I was mildly surprised to hear that viewpoint.
Whenever some high-ranking CCP member is said to be doing something anti-corruption, it has to be understood that it really means anti-opposition. There's nothing going on about anti-corruption in the CCP; they're all utterly, irredeemably corrupt to the core, a big part of why someone even ascends to a high position in that organization. It's corruption beyond the wildest dreams of most people, like basements full of gold bars and such.
This book has fun anecdotes of elite graft, which is entertaining but not particularly useful for those interested in mechanisms of PRC corruption. Guanxi is just age old political patronage networks with Chinese characteristics, it's mundane not revelatory. The seminal book / academic for those interested in understanding PRC corruption systematically is Yuen Yuen Ang, China's Gilded Age: The Paradox of Economic Boom and Vast Corruption. The TLDR metaphor compares corruption to drugs, there are different types of corruption, with different effects. Chinese elite exchange-corruption discussed in the book is likened to steroids that boosts growth [0]. There's a reason why PRC is the only country where increased corruption is correlated to increased growth, as posited by Yukon Huan, World Bank director for China. But ultimately, drugs have harmful side effects that will eventually catch up to the body-politic, hence the anti-corruption drive. The useful takeaway from review:
>In some aspects, Mr Shum’s book supports Mr Xi’s diagnosis of China’s ills. It describes sleaze that largely predates Mr Xi’s elevation as party chief in 2012. Since then, the Xi era has witnessed an anti-corruption drive that has seen more than 1.5m officials punished. Mr Xi himself grumbles about foot-dragging officials who put parochial interests first.
...
>It argues that Mr Xi’s anti-corruption drive is as much a campaign to consolidate power as a sincere attempt to reform a rotten system.
Note "sincere attempt". Xi's anti-corruption and power consolidation doesn't have to be mutually exclusive or contradictory. Xi didn't start with 1.5M political enemies, there's no reason to be so comprehensive except sincere need to tackle a widely recognized issue. There's good reason to want to consolidate power if Xi has to step on so many toes. Frankly, a problem as large as PRC bureaucratic corruption in the 2010s can't be tackled without centralizing power.
53 comments
[ 2.5 ms ] story [ 104 ms ] threadAnother book that I really enjoy that seem to be of the same ilk: confession of an economic hitman
1) Pervasive use of whataboutism; 2) Similar arguments in all comments, with a change or two in order or synonymous; 3) Use of Mandarin idioms translated to English, like "double confirm"; 4) Use of Mandarin sentence order translated to English, like "The USA last year in February in Afghanistan did ...".
It's become a bit of game for me. I wish I enough knowledge of NLP to make this into a model and open source it as a wumao detector.
https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/xi-jinpings-book...
(President Xi, if you’re reading I’d love to see a comment from you as a “long-time lurker”. Or, even better, wow us by announcing an AI advancement here with a “Show HN” post.)
"No Wall Too High" by Xu Hongci is another unlikely excellent story of a man escaping from communist China. He's imprisoned multiple times and ends up escaping to eventually marry a woman from Mongolia. Then in the Deng era he settles again in Shanghai and publishes his story in Chinese. Later this manuscript was discovered via his surviving wife, translated to English and published in 2017.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01HMNETEA/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?...
This is not unique to China, of course, but it does mean business, politics and even seemingly mundane things like healthcare and schools operate quite differently to what you might expect.
In my own experience, where I went to kindergarten was an outcome of who my grandma knew. Similarly, when I was sick and needed to see a doctor, I had to know someone who knew someone...
Yes - it's similar in the west. But to say they're the same would be like saying 100M dash and marathon is the same sport.
I'd argue the reason you don't see much Guanxi in the America is because the best healthcare or school are already run by the private sector.
I was recommended this by my Econ professor and it left a lasting impression on me
Say what you want about western government but I’d much rather anger the US government as a US citizen than anger the Chinese government as a Chinese citizen. In China I’d be extremely concerned about my family arrested, arbitrary trials, forced medication with debilitating drugs, bullet in my head, etc.
In America we may let the Sacklers buy their way out of prison but I prefer this to the fear, violence, illegitimacy, and madness of communism. You don’t appreciate the rule of law and equal justice until you are on the wrong side of power.
In China the rule is Snowden. Everyone becomes Snowden if you speak any truth whatsoever to power.
If your ideas start a movement and those people vote, then politicians will listen. You could also hire lobbyists and use financial resources to influence. The point is ideas without influence might as well never have existed.
In China however they police and censor even individual social media posts, let alone allow influencers to gain millions of followers if they disagree with government policy. This is a deeply paranoid and illegitimate government that uses fear and violence to get its way. Very different from western democracy.
I'd much rather get the opinion of the Hong Kong journalists that were detained by the CCP, or any of the millions in detainment camps- whose "crime" was religious or ethnic affiliation!
Government can completely ruin your life if they want to, especially if you are not rich and well connected. Why instead of being concerned with what is wrong in your own backyard would you console yourself that it is worse in China. You just play to the politicians who want to take your attention away from their own fuck ups by feeding you stories about what is happening elsewhere.
Personally I am way more concerned about totally fucked up things in my own country. For example things Civil Forfeiture laws (I am Canadian but when US sneezes we catch the cold). Or when Canada champions human rights by being about the only western democratic country in the world that allows indefinite detention of a person in max security prison without said person having committed or charged with any crime. Or our so called justice system in general when those who have money can have bail and decent defense while poor often lavish in detention and have to take plea deals. etc. etc.
In China there is no logic, just corruption, power, and great men who tell those beneath them what to do unquestioningly. Many countries are like this - most countries - but only one authoritarian country is a superpower that could perhaps rival the US.
Did they actually do that, or were that just sufficiently careful so that they can't be held criminally responsible? AFAIK the company itself was convicted. While it sucks in the public eye that they weren't convicted, I'm not sure whether holding kangaroo court and/or bill of attainer to punish them (ie. "we can't really technically convict them but we can all agree they're baddies so it's okay to punish them anyways") is any better.
The calculus for politicians is to take the quick win and the cash, or let someone else 30 years later get the victory while potentially taking heat now.
Whatever happened I still prefer this system to the “you said something that made me angry, 20 years hard labor followed by execution for you!” style of justice.
Edit- see one above
From what I could tell, there is a whole system of unwritten rules about how different political factions could collect their "percentage", how these factions compete with each other and eliminate each other and so on.
In a way, it is efficient because everyone who matters (i.e. princelings who control the CCP) has an incentive to "play the game". It is efficient because there are no nasty courts to slow you down, you don't have to deal with the lowest bidder nonsense - it all comes down to connections. The party credibility and the need hold power serves as a very powerful check on the system to prevent the system from becoming too blatantly corrupt and keeps the system going.
But if you aren't someone who matters - i.e. a princeling, you will be forever on the outside looking in.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08VJP821L/ref=dp-kindle-redirect
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28439448
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28439448 ("Missing businesswoman urges ex-husband not to publish book critical of China (npr.org)")
Red Roulette: An Insider's Story of Wealth, Power, Corruption, and Vengeance in Today's China https://www.amazon.com/dp/1982156155
>In some aspects, Mr Shum’s book supports Mr Xi’s diagnosis of China’s ills. It describes sleaze that largely predates Mr Xi’s elevation as party chief in 2012. Since then, the Xi era has witnessed an anti-corruption drive that has seen more than 1.5m officials punished. Mr Xi himself grumbles about foot-dragging officials who put parochial interests first.
...
>It argues that Mr Xi’s anti-corruption drive is as much a campaign to consolidate power as a sincere attempt to reform a rotten system.
Note "sincere attempt". Xi's anti-corruption and power consolidation doesn't have to be mutually exclusive or contradictory. Xi didn't start with 1.5M political enemies, there's no reason to be so comprehensive except sincere need to tackle a widely recognized issue. There's good reason to want to consolidate power if Xi has to step on so many toes. Frankly, a problem as large as PRC bureaucratic corruption in the 2010s can't be tackled without centralizing power.
[0] https://oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Yuen-...