On Chinese Culture, the Tribute System, the 100 Years of Humiliation, The Art of War, “One China with Taiwan Part of China,” Where We Are Now, and Where We Are Headed
In 1982, I had the honor of a lifetime to serve as the Press Secretary to John T Downey when he ran for US Senate in Connecticut. Jack had the unique and unfortunate experience being the longest Prisoner of War in US History. A CIA operative his plane was shot down over Manchuria in 1952. For the first two years after his capture he said he was in solitary confinement. For the last 18 he was among the general population of the prison.
After he was released - thanks to Nixon and Kissinger - in early 1973, he went to Harvard Law School and in 1982 decided to run for the US Senate.
I spent hundreds if not thousands of hours with him in the car driving him to speaking engagements all over the state. I heard his story a couple of hundred times. But best of all I had long hours in the car to talk with him about China.
Jack witnessed the cultural revolution writ small in the prison where he was held. Clearly he had lots of time to observe and think about what he saw.
But something he said about Chinese culture resonates to this day. It was simple and comprehensive.
"Richard," he said, "never forget that at the end of the day, the Chinese wish to drink tea alone."
It means they don't want partners. They don't need foreign incursions. But they want control and stability. The Belt and Road Initiative is a classic example of this.
In western mind partner is almost synonymous to ally. An alliance is always built against somebody and that makes the target insecure. That insecurity in the end creates more instability and conflicts. In this sense China doesn't do alliances or want allies. In fact, China really has zero allies. Partners in limited scope and purpose, yes, as in Belt and Road Initiative partners.
The meaning in pronunciation of China is " the land in center" so everything they do is about them and around them not outside. Everyone could think they are against America but in fact they do for themself they don't care about the world like America's doing now
Love the article especially the assessment on the Chinese perspective on war, which I find the US public to be woefully ill-informed about. I would add that war is discussed in both Taoism and Confucianism.
On war, Tao Te Ching Verse 31: "Weapons are instruments of ill omen, not the instruments of a cultivated person. When one is compelled to use them, it is best to do so with calm restraint. Victory is not a cause for rejoicing. To rejoice at victory is to rejoice in the slaughter of human beings."
On the same topic, Analects 15:1: Duke Ling of Wei questioned Confucius about battlefield formations and military tactics. Confucius replied, "When it comes to matters of sacrificial vessels, I have some learning. I have never studied military affairs." He left the state the very next day.
While I would not go as far to say the Chinese rulers are pacifists, the most important Chinese texts governing China for the past two thousand years are clear that war is bad.
So I have zero educated views on China or its culture but what I would like to ask you is: what is your view of how its authorities treat is citizens? It seems from the outside that they have very few freedoms and that there is a constant fear of being oppressed for simply speaking out against whatever policy the government is pushing. It also seems that they have very little tolerance for religious liberty. As an American, who believes very strongly in individual and familial rights, religious freedom, and limited governmental control, because of the constant threat of tyranny, my concern with the Chinese government is that they will seek to spread their philosophy of hierarchical oppressive governance (ie Tiananmen Square) around the world…just like most empires do. Why are you saying that it will be different if China is the global power when they seem to treat their people tyrannically. I find it hard to believe they will have a “hands off approach” to global leadership and imperialism will end up being their modus operandi…just like most other empires. Please correct my views of what life is like in china if they are ignorant.
You have bought into the American propaganda about China. Here's one fact that should make it clear that such suppression is false. 200 million Chinese leave China every year to travel the world and return. If it was so oppressive why would they go back. Just watch videos of ordinary Chinese going about their daily routine. How is it any different than your routine? If anything, China is more responsive to its people. Clearly if it uses its economy to better the lives of people not in rich people, that alone should make you understand what China is all about. Just watch some videos on China and you'll get a different perspective right away. Even if you go into watching the videos with your bias, it will change quickly
You have bought into the American propaganda about China. Here's one fact that should make it clear that such suppression is false. 200 million Chinese leave China every year to travel the world and return. If it was so oppressive why would they go back. Just watch videos of ordinary Chinese going about their daily routine. How is it any different than your routine? If anything, China is more responsive to its people. Clearly if it uses its economy to better the lives of people not in rich people, that alone should make you understand what China is all about. Just watch some videos on China and you'll get a different perspective right away. Even if you go into watching the videos with your bias, it will change quickly
You have bought into the American propaganda about China. Here's one fact that should make it clear that such suppression is false. 200 million Chinese leave China every year to travel the world and return. If it was so oppressive why would they go back. Just watch videos of ordinary Chinese going about their daily routine. How is it any different than your routine? If anything, China is more responsive to its people. Clearly if it uses its economy to better the lives of people not in rich people, that alone should make you understand what China is all about. Just watch some videos on China and you'll get a different perspective right away. Even if you go into watching the videos with your bias, it will change quickly
You have bought into the American propaganda about China. Here's one fact that should make it clear that such suppression is false. 200 million Chinese leave China every year to travel the world and return. If it was so oppressive why would they go back. Just watch videos of ordinary Chinese going about their daily routine. How is it any different than your routine? If anything, China is more responsive to its people. Clearly if it uses its economy to better the lives of people not in rich people, that alone should make you understand what China is all about. Just watch some videos on China and you'll get a different perspective right away. Even if you go into watching the videos with your bias, it will change quickly
The Art of War and the 36 Stratagems are their procedures and code. The single biggest theme within them is DECEPTION. Quite simply, if they say they want to fight, it means they do not, and are not confident. If they pose confidence and strength, it is false. They were more frightening when they were silent. Nobody wants to emigrate to China or to volunteer for their culture. That is the tell. The rest of world must keep it simple, just look at the conduct and stand firm on what is unacceptable. The Chinese are shrewd and I respect that and stay cautious. If I find the agenda.. thats what they wanted me to find. It is not the agenda. You cannot second guess, but my view is to get strong and independent and not be unnecessarily afraid because of a grand parade - is the wests best course of action. I prefer Western culture and Freedom.
Is Chen a name of Chinese origin? Broad Denial is broad deception. We see you Mr Chen. We don't believe you. Can you fight the fight? You talk with confidence but will you back it up? I say we won't find out.
Their objectives are simplistic. Bully the weak to what you want. Make all others weak relative to you, (or the perceived you). It is school child mentality. Stand up to the bully, preferably together... they disappear (until the next one). (making things non-simple is part of the deception)
I dont think anyone alive has bullied China. Hamas and the CCCP are provocateurs, that there are consequences are predicted or tested by them both. If you provoke, make sure you can deal with the consequences. I observe that like all bullies, when they cannot handle what they started, they cry victim. Many fall for it, that the deception. Provoke, then complain about the consequences of that provocation. Perhaps it would be best if we did live in a multi polar world. Let the CCCP have their patch and my heart breaks for the poor suffering of the non CCCP Chinese population (same as the innocent people in Gaza)
You are right about one thing. 'No migration.' China has not developed through expansion and war, so it does not need foreign immigrants unless they are contributors. This means they don't require you to accept their culture, nor do they need immigrants. This is different from the United States, where 'Natives' are no longer the predominant ethnic group.
One comment said that China only needs collaborators, not partners, which I think is quite true.
China may not believe in building empires, but the current regime has committed that exact mistake by occupying Tibet and Xinjiang. Unfortunately, they are not following their own advice and this is going to turn into their Achilles heel.
Thank you for sharing your read of Chinese culture - excellent recap.
In 60 BC, the Western-Han government set up the Protectorate of the Western Regions to administer today’s Xinjiang. This happened long before France colonized Africa or the United States expanded across the American continent.
Ive been to Tibet myself and even did research on it. The ruling class used brutal methods to suppress people. The stories about taking organs from living people for ritual tools are well-documented in archival sources. Seeing this material shocked me as much as learning about Verdun for the first time. So honestly, between the slave owners and Mao’s government, I know which one I trust more.
If you don’t believe me, feel free to look up the key info I mentioned or visit there.
These only about the history of Xinjiang and Tibet. It does NOT mean I support the Chinese government’s policies on workers’ rights or gender equality.
You're contrasting China and the United States. Both have contrasting capacities for managing different basic tensions and that explains a lot of what you wrote here.
China appears exceptionally capable of sustaining the Safety - Action tension and the Time - Uncertainty tension. It can manage uncertainty and maintain continuity for long periods before making changes. They are optimized fro this culturally. Although, as with all basic tensions they cycle back and forth, they tend to stay closer to Safety and are fine with Uncertainty.
The United States is stronger at expanding agency (independance) than integrating responsibility. Its recurring cycle is giving agency that eventually generates consequences that then require a rebalancing of responsibility. But at the same time are closer to the action and Time (now) side of the Saftery - Action and Time - Uncertainty tensions.
Viewed this way, the changing world you order you speak of is the test of which tensions the prevailing conditions are placing on nations and how effectively different cultures can manage those tensions.
If culture is destiny, then perhaps the deepest cycles are the recurring tensions each civilization repeatedly confronts and the characteristic ways they respond to them. You can almost predict it.
This is a well written and interesting. But I would say that at points it wields way to strong of a top-down narrative and when doing so misreads Chinese history and even its current institutional architecture. Like, calling indebted local governments as inefficient entities on 'life support' from Beijing completely inverts the structural cause. If these localities are facing acute fiscal strain, its mostly because 1) thats where the borrowing for one of (in relative terms but number in absolute terms) quickest and most spectacular development stories and history was located and if it really starts to get worse it will be because the central government has been recently systematically stripping them of local revenue-generation tools while trying to clamp down on their localized credit networks.
The historic productivity increases of recent decades that the author (appropriately) praises were executed by those very local governments and their diversified-member local party branches in a decentralized bottom-up system!
Also, the essay makes the common Westerner's mistake of squeezing 2,000 years of Chinese civilization into a singular, top-down Confucian caricature of pure obedience. But since the 1980s, China’s economic system has used a bottom-up, experimental fashion than the heavily bureaucratized, top-down regulatory states of the modern West. Which the essay ironically says is the bottom-up system; China has been decentralized since the 1980s while the West has been running centralized systems that are deeply out of character for it (at least out of character for the western-West). By completely ignoring civic systems, institutional mechanics, and the mass-organizational matrix of the party, the piece mistakes the ceremonial theater of central coordination for the actual, messy physics of localized economic governance.
"Culture is destiny" is the foundation of the whole piece, and it's compelling when applied to China. The problem is that it applies equally to the subordinate states, and their cultures predict something different.
The historical tribute system worked because the subordinate states were culturally Chinese. They wrote in Chinese characters, followed Confucian norms, and adopted Chinese civilisational assumptions about hierarchy. The tribute wasn't just military or economic. It was civilisational, which is why it lasted two thousand years. The modern version you describe has the military and economic dimensions but not the cultural one. Japan's culture predicts resistance to hierarchy, not acceptance of it. Taiwan's, after seventy-five years of independent democratic development, predicts self-determination. South Korea's predicts alliance-seeking. The Philippines' predicts balancing between great powers, not subordination to one. None of these cultures are tribute-shaped, and if culture really is destiny, that matters as much as China's culture does.
What you're describing may well happen. But a tribute system without civilisational buy-in is a protection arrangement, and protection arrangements last only as long as no credible alternative exists. The states visiting Beijing right now aren't paying tribute. They're hedging. And hedging reverses the day the alternative becomes credible again, because the cultural glue that made the old system stable for millennia was never applied.
Excellent essay with deep knowledge about Chinese culture and history!
The modern tribute system is built on industrial gravity.
China has become the world’s most important producer, consumer market, source of capital, infrastructure provider, and supply-chain hub. At the same time, the Global South and middle powers are recalculating the balance of power between China and the United States.
They may not welcome a China-centered order. But they increasingly find it difficult to believe that the United States can maintain the old order for the long term, with stability, credibility, and low cost.
What China is more likely to build is a regional order in which countries recognize China’s central position, avoid open confrontation with China’s core interests, and continue to benefit from China’s economic system.
That is the core of the modern tribute system: a hierarchical, relational, center-periphery order organized around China’s industrial and economic gravity.
Taiwan is the central test case of this emerging order. Beijing is using pressure, deterrence, economic tools, psychological warfare, diplomatic isolation, and gradual changes on the ground to expand its sovereign control over Taiwan without triggering a full-scale war.
Is it possible that the CCP would invite "observers" from any of the Taiwanese political parties to attend the 21st Party Congress next year? That seems like a great wedge opportunity for Beijing if military action does not interfere in the meantime.
Any significant Chinese use of military force against the Philippines, I think, would be a short fuse to a US military response. Taiwan, not so much.
I’m old enough to remember Senator Goldwater openly advocating ‘nuke ‘em’ in reference to China. The Chinese responded by building defensive tunnels under their main cities.
The US has a ring of containment bases around China in Japan, Phillipines and Australia. It constantly sails warships through the Taiwan Strait within range of major Chinese cities and populations centres.
Put the moccasins on the other foot.
What would be the reaction in America if China projected similar forces around the US?
The Hundred years of humiliation, the international US sponsored coup d’etats, the currency diplomacy, the continued bullying of China and other regimes the US dislikes has taught China it must stand strong to resist coercion.
I live in Australia. China is our major trading partner and will not attack our joint trade routes. I don’t believe we need to defend them with AUKUS nuclear powered subs- we need to defend ourselves and can with emerging technologies.
I do not feel threatened by China except for the fact our Governments wish to draw us closer to the US alliance and our US bases could easily become a target in any US/China conflict.
We love our freedoms down here and intend to keep them.
I’m Chinese and your described “hierarchical, family-like approach to achieving order” makes me sick. That’s why I want to migrate to another country who values liberty
As a Korean, I am familiar with the concept of the tributary system and the Confucian hierarchy that has historically shaped East Asia.
I also agree that China is likely to pursue some form of strategic exit or expansion path to preserve its system and long-term stability.
For years, I have thought that Taiwan and TSMC could be at the center of that process. As time passes, it feels as if that possibility is moving closer rather than further away.
Thank you for sharing your perspective.
If this thesis is correct, what should an individual investor prepare for?
What are the first observable market signals that would confirm this transition is actually underway?
Just got back from a month in China as well. The tribute system has been around for centuries, as evidenced by Korea/Japans adaptation of the written language and Confucian systems, and 2200 years of Silk Road trade - all without wars or colonialism.
Through painful lessons from foreign invasions and unreliable trade partners (bombing of Chinese embassy by the US, cutoff from GPS and space programs), China recognized its ignorance about peaceful trade without projecting a strong military and has a focused mission to become a world leader in military/space/tech. Due to embargos/tariffs (CNC/semiconductor equipment/chips), it has focused on domestic self-reliance across industries, resulting in unprecedented scale globally.
At this point, China cannot be contained. It has the scale and fully integrated supply chain that no one can compete with, and that's the reality of the situation. I would argue that those who don't know the Chinese equity markets are at great risk of becoming poor investors.
For most ordinary people, it seems the choice is between two systems. One is built around concentrating wealth, assets, capital and ultimately power in the hands of a small minority, while persuading the majority that this serves their interests. The other aims to reduce that gap and raise living standards more broadly.
Neither system has fully delivered widespread prosperity, peace or stability. But one does not appear to have those goals embedded in its design, whereas the other at least aspires to them.
Perhaps the real question is whether there is a third system—one that can genuinely deliver prosperity, peace and security for the majority.
Richard, no choice for the people. Things will develop regardless of what the people want. Once these big waves of change come, there is no controlling them nor stopping them. History repeats itself. You prob know this. Nothing we can do about it.
As with every great revolution, this will cause great misery for Europe and the America's. But several generations later, the people will be even better off than before.
I think Musk and Gates refer to this.
This is that 3rd "option" that you asked about. It's not an option. It happens naturally, regardless of who likes it or not.
I routinely ask people.. which is larger.. the Mediteranean Sea or the South China Sea.. nobody gets it right... most are surprised at the truth. The South China sea is 30% larger than the Med. It is a huge resource/ land/ sea grab... don't be foolish or fooled. Taiwan is merely the other shore...
In 1982, I had the honor of a lifetime to serve as the Press Secretary to John T Downey when he ran for US Senate in Connecticut. Jack had the unique and unfortunate experience being the longest Prisoner of War in US History. A CIA operative his plane was shot down over Manchuria in 1952. For the first two years after his capture he said he was in solitary confinement. For the last 18 he was among the general population of the prison.
After he was released - thanks to Nixon and Kissinger - in early 1973, he went to Harvard Law School and in 1982 decided to run for the US Senate.
I spent hundreds if not thousands of hours with him in the car driving him to speaking engagements all over the state. I heard his story a couple of hundred times. But best of all I had long hours in the car to talk with him about China.
Jack witnessed the cultural revolution writ small in the prison where he was held. Clearly he had lots of time to observe and think about what he saw.
But something he said about Chinese culture resonates to this day. It was simple and comprehensive.
"Richard," he said, "never forget that at the end of the day, the Chinese wish to drink tea alone."
-RDB
It means they don't want partners. They don't need foreign incursions. But they want control and stability. The Belt and Road Initiative is a classic example of this.
Drink tea alone? What does it mean? They don’t need partners?
In western mind partner is almost synonymous to ally. An alliance is always built against somebody and that makes the target insecure. That insecurity in the end creates more instability and conflicts. In this sense China doesn't do alliances or want allies. In fact, China really has zero allies. Partners in limited scope and purpose, yes, as in Belt and Road Initiative partners.
The meaning in pronunciation of China is " the land in center" so everything they do is about them and around them not outside. Everyone could think they are against America but in fact they do for themself they don't care about the world like America's doing now
Love the article especially the assessment on the Chinese perspective on war, which I find the US public to be woefully ill-informed about. I would add that war is discussed in both Taoism and Confucianism.
On war, Tao Te Ching Verse 31: "Weapons are instruments of ill omen, not the instruments of a cultivated person. When one is compelled to use them, it is best to do so with calm restraint. Victory is not a cause for rejoicing. To rejoice at victory is to rejoice in the slaughter of human beings."
On the same topic, Analects 15:1: Duke Ling of Wei questioned Confucius about battlefield formations and military tactics. Confucius replied, "When it comes to matters of sacrificial vessels, I have some learning. I have never studied military affairs." He left the state the very next day.
While I would not go as far to say the Chinese rulers are pacifists, the most important Chinese texts governing China for the past two thousand years are clear that war is bad.
So I have zero educated views on China or its culture but what I would like to ask you is: what is your view of how its authorities treat is citizens? It seems from the outside that they have very few freedoms and that there is a constant fear of being oppressed for simply speaking out against whatever policy the government is pushing. It also seems that they have very little tolerance for religious liberty. As an American, who believes very strongly in individual and familial rights, religious freedom, and limited governmental control, because of the constant threat of tyranny, my concern with the Chinese government is that they will seek to spread their philosophy of hierarchical oppressive governance (ie Tiananmen Square) around the world…just like most empires do. Why are you saying that it will be different if China is the global power when they seem to treat their people tyrannically. I find it hard to believe they will have a “hands off approach” to global leadership and imperialism will end up being their modus operandi…just like most other empires. Please correct my views of what life is like in china if they are ignorant.
You have bought into the American propaganda about China. Here's one fact that should make it clear that such suppression is false. 200 million Chinese leave China every year to travel the world and return. If it was so oppressive why would they go back. Just watch videos of ordinary Chinese going about their daily routine. How is it any different than your routine? If anything, China is more responsive to its people. Clearly if it uses its economy to better the lives of people not in rich people, that alone should make you understand what China is all about. Just watch some videos on China and you'll get a different perspective right away. Even if you go into watching the videos with your bias, it will change quickly
You have bought into the American propaganda about China. Here's one fact that should make it clear that such suppression is false. 200 million Chinese leave China every year to travel the world and return. If it was so oppressive why would they go back. Just watch videos of ordinary Chinese going about their daily routine. How is it any different than your routine? If anything, China is more responsive to its people. Clearly if it uses its economy to better the lives of people not in rich people, that alone should make you understand what China is all about. Just watch some videos on China and you'll get a different perspective right away. Even if you go into watching the videos with your bias, it will change quickly
You have bought into the American propaganda about China. Here's one fact that should make it clear that such suppression is false. 200 million Chinese leave China every year to travel the world and return. If it was so oppressive why would they go back. Just watch videos of ordinary Chinese going about their daily routine. How is it any different than your routine? If anything, China is more responsive to its people. Clearly if it uses its economy to better the lives of people not in rich people, that alone should make you understand what China is all about. Just watch some videos on China and you'll get a different perspective right away. Even if you go into watching the videos with your bias, it will change quickly
You have bought into the American propaganda about China. Here's one fact that should make it clear that such suppression is false. 200 million Chinese leave China every year to travel the world and return. If it was so oppressive why would they go back. Just watch videos of ordinary Chinese going about their daily routine. How is it any different than your routine? If anything, China is more responsive to its people. Clearly if it uses its economy to better the lives of people not in rich people, that alone should make you understand what China is all about. Just watch some videos on China and you'll get a different perspective right away. Even if you go into watching the videos with your bias, it will change quickly
The Art of War and the 36 Stratagems are their procedures and code. The single biggest theme within them is DECEPTION. Quite simply, if they say they want to fight, it means they do not, and are not confident. If they pose confidence and strength, it is false. They were more frightening when they were silent. Nobody wants to emigrate to China or to volunteer for their culture. That is the tell. The rest of world must keep it simple, just look at the conduct and stand firm on what is unacceptable. The Chinese are shrewd and I respect that and stay cautious. If I find the agenda.. thats what they wanted me to find. It is not the agenda. You cannot second guess, but my view is to get strong and independent and not be unnecessarily afraid because of a grand parade - is the wests best course of action. I prefer Western culture and Freedom.
well....that's not true...
Is Chen a name of Chinese origin? Broad Denial is broad deception. We see you Mr Chen. We don't believe you. Can you fight the fight? You talk with confidence but will you back it up? I say we won't find out.
This seems simplistic to me
Their objectives are simplistic. Bully the weak to what you want. Make all others weak relative to you, (or the perceived you). It is school child mentality. Stand up to the bully, preferably together... they disappear (until the next one). (making things non-simple is part of the deception)
This sounds unhinged and not based on knowledge
It sounds like the harm suffered by the Palestinian people.
I dont think anyone alive has bullied China. Hamas and the CCCP are provocateurs, that there are consequences are predicted or tested by them both. If you provoke, make sure you can deal with the consequences. I observe that like all bullies, when they cannot handle what they started, they cry victim. Many fall for it, that the deception. Provoke, then complain about the consequences of that provocation. Perhaps it would be best if we did live in a multi polar world. Let the CCCP have their patch and my heart breaks for the poor suffering of the non CCCP Chinese population (same as the innocent people in Gaza)
You are right about one thing. 'No migration.' China has not developed through expansion and war, so it does not need foreign immigrants unless they are contributors. This means they don't require you to accept their culture, nor do they need immigrants. This is different from the United States, where 'Natives' are no longer the predominant ethnic group.
One comment said that China only needs collaborators, not partners, which I think is quite true.
China may not believe in building empires, but the current regime has committed that exact mistake by occupying Tibet and Xinjiang. Unfortunately, they are not following their own advice and this is going to turn into their Achilles heel.
Thank you for sharing your read of Chinese culture - excellent recap.
You mean the Qing dynasty? Please inform yourself before talking about something you clearly don’t know about.
why is a barbarian joining a civilized, adult dialogue? Crawl back to your MAGA base and drown in your kool-aid there.
In 60 BC, the Western-Han government set up the Protectorate of the Western Regions to administer today’s Xinjiang. This happened long before France colonized Africa or the United States expanded across the American continent.
Ive been to Tibet myself and even did research on it. The ruling class used brutal methods to suppress people. The stories about taking organs from living people for ritual tools are well-documented in archival sources. Seeing this material shocked me as much as learning about Verdun for the first time. So honestly, between the slave owners and Mao’s government, I know which one I trust more.
If you don’t believe me, feel free to look up the key info I mentioned or visit there.
These only about the history of Xinjiang and Tibet. It does NOT mean I support the Chinese government’s policies on workers’ rights or gender equality.
You're contrasting China and the United States. Both have contrasting capacities for managing different basic tensions and that explains a lot of what you wrote here.
China appears exceptionally capable of sustaining the Safety - Action tension and the Time - Uncertainty tension. It can manage uncertainty and maintain continuity for long periods before making changes. They are optimized fro this culturally. Although, as with all basic tensions they cycle back and forth, they tend to stay closer to Safety and are fine with Uncertainty.
The United States is stronger at expanding agency (independance) than integrating responsibility. Its recurring cycle is giving agency that eventually generates consequences that then require a rebalancing of responsibility. But at the same time are closer to the action and Time (now) side of the Saftery - Action and Time - Uncertainty tensions.
Viewed this way, the changing world you order you speak of is the test of which tensions the prevailing conditions are placing on nations and how effectively different cultures can manage those tensions.
If culture is destiny, then perhaps the deepest cycles are the recurring tensions each civilization repeatedly confronts and the characteristic ways they respond to them. You can almost predict it.
This is a well written and interesting. But I would say that at points it wields way to strong of a top-down narrative and when doing so misreads Chinese history and even its current institutional architecture. Like, calling indebted local governments as inefficient entities on 'life support' from Beijing completely inverts the structural cause. If these localities are facing acute fiscal strain, its mostly because 1) thats where the borrowing for one of (in relative terms but number in absolute terms) quickest and most spectacular development stories and history was located and if it really starts to get worse it will be because the central government has been recently systematically stripping them of local revenue-generation tools while trying to clamp down on their localized credit networks.
The historic productivity increases of recent decades that the author (appropriately) praises were executed by those very local governments and their diversified-member local party branches in a decentralized bottom-up system!
Also, the essay makes the common Westerner's mistake of squeezing 2,000 years of Chinese civilization into a singular, top-down Confucian caricature of pure obedience. But since the 1980s, China’s economic system has used a bottom-up, experimental fashion than the heavily bureaucratized, top-down regulatory states of the modern West. Which the essay ironically says is the bottom-up system; China has been decentralized since the 1980s while the West has been running centralized systems that are deeply out of character for it (at least out of character for the western-West). By completely ignoring civic systems, institutional mechanics, and the mass-organizational matrix of the party, the piece mistakes the ceremonial theater of central coordination for the actual, messy physics of localized economic governance.
"Culture is destiny" is the foundation of the whole piece, and it's compelling when applied to China. The problem is that it applies equally to the subordinate states, and their cultures predict something different.
The historical tribute system worked because the subordinate states were culturally Chinese. They wrote in Chinese characters, followed Confucian norms, and adopted Chinese civilisational assumptions about hierarchy. The tribute wasn't just military or economic. It was civilisational, which is why it lasted two thousand years. The modern version you describe has the military and economic dimensions but not the cultural one. Japan's culture predicts resistance to hierarchy, not acceptance of it. Taiwan's, after seventy-five years of independent democratic development, predicts self-determination. South Korea's predicts alliance-seeking. The Philippines' predicts balancing between great powers, not subordination to one. None of these cultures are tribute-shaped, and if culture really is destiny, that matters as much as China's culture does.
What you're describing may well happen. But a tribute system without civilisational buy-in is a protection arrangement, and protection arrangements last only as long as no credible alternative exists. The states visiting Beijing right now aren't paying tribute. They're hedging. And hedging reverses the day the alternative becomes credible again, because the cultural glue that made the old system stable for millennia was never applied.
Excellent essay with deep knowledge about Chinese culture and history!
The modern tribute system is built on industrial gravity.
China has become the world’s most important producer, consumer market, source of capital, infrastructure provider, and supply-chain hub. At the same time, the Global South and middle powers are recalculating the balance of power between China and the United States.
They may not welcome a China-centered order. But they increasingly find it difficult to believe that the United States can maintain the old order for the long term, with stability, credibility, and low cost.
What China is more likely to build is a regional order in which countries recognize China’s central position, avoid open confrontation with China’s core interests, and continue to benefit from China’s economic system.
That is the core of the modern tribute system: a hierarchical, relational, center-periphery order organized around China’s industrial and economic gravity.
Taiwan is the central test case of this emerging order. Beijing is using pressure, deterrence, economic tools, psychological warfare, diplomatic isolation, and gradual changes on the ground to expand its sovereign control over Taiwan without triggering a full-scale war.
I have a question and a comment.
Is it possible that the CCP would invite "observers" from any of the Taiwanese political parties to attend the 21st Party Congress next year? That seems like a great wedge opportunity for Beijing if military action does not interfere in the meantime.
Any significant Chinese use of military force against the Philippines, I think, would be a short fuse to a US military response. Taiwan, not so much.
What about all of Taiwan’s semiconductors?The US definitely cares about protecting those, err - I mean the Taiwanese ppl.
People don’t like bullies.
I’m old enough to remember Senator Goldwater openly advocating ‘nuke ‘em’ in reference to China. The Chinese responded by building defensive tunnels under their main cities.
The US has a ring of containment bases around China in Japan, Phillipines and Australia. It constantly sails warships through the Taiwan Strait within range of major Chinese cities and populations centres.
Put the moccasins on the other foot.
What would be the reaction in America if China projected similar forces around the US?
The Hundred years of humiliation, the international US sponsored coup d’etats, the currency diplomacy, the continued bullying of China and other regimes the US dislikes has taught China it must stand strong to resist coercion.
I live in Australia. China is our major trading partner and will not attack our joint trade routes. I don’t believe we need to defend them with AUKUS nuclear powered subs- we need to defend ourselves and can with emerging technologies.
I do not feel threatened by China except for the fact our Governments wish to draw us closer to the US alliance and our US bases could easily become a target in any US/China conflict.
We love our freedoms down here and intend to keep them.
I’m Chinese and your described “hierarchical, family-like approach to achieving order” makes me sick. That’s why I want to migrate to another country who values liberty
As a Korean, I am familiar with the concept of the tributary system and the Confucian hierarchy that has historically shaped East Asia.
I also agree that China is likely to pursue some form of strategic exit or expansion path to preserve its system and long-term stability.
For years, I have thought that Taiwan and TSMC could be at the center of that process. As time passes, it feels as if that possibility is moving closer rather than further away.
Thank you for sharing your perspective.
If this thesis is correct, what should an individual investor prepare for?
What are the first observable market signals that would confirm this transition is actually underway?
Just got back from a month in China as well. The tribute system has been around for centuries, as evidenced by Korea/Japans adaptation of the written language and Confucian systems, and 2200 years of Silk Road trade - all without wars or colonialism.
Through painful lessons from foreign invasions and unreliable trade partners (bombing of Chinese embassy by the US, cutoff from GPS and space programs), China recognized its ignorance about peaceful trade without projecting a strong military and has a focused mission to become a world leader in military/space/tech. Due to embargos/tariffs (CNC/semiconductor equipment/chips), it has focused on domestic self-reliance across industries, resulting in unprecedented scale globally.
At this point, China cannot be contained. It has the scale and fully integrated supply chain that no one can compete with, and that's the reality of the situation. I would argue that those who don't know the Chinese equity markets are at great risk of becoming poor investors.
For most ordinary people, it seems the choice is between two systems. One is built around concentrating wealth, assets, capital and ultimately power in the hands of a small minority, while persuading the majority that this serves their interests. The other aims to reduce that gap and raise living standards more broadly.
Neither system has fully delivered widespread prosperity, peace or stability. But one does not appear to have those goals embedded in its design, whereas the other at least aspires to them.
Perhaps the real question is whether there is a third system—one that can genuinely deliver prosperity, peace and security for the majority.
Richard, no choice for the people. Things will develop regardless of what the people want. Once these big waves of change come, there is no controlling them nor stopping them. History repeats itself. You prob know this. Nothing we can do about it.
As with every great revolution, this will cause great misery for Europe and the America's. But several generations later, the people will be even better off than before.
I think Musk and Gates refer to this.
This is that 3rd "option" that you asked about. It's not an option. It happens naturally, regardless of who likes it or not.
Awesome piece! Can't wait for your next book, 'Principles for dealing with THE CHOAGONG WORLD ORDER'!
I routinely ask people.. which is larger.. the Mediteranean Sea or the South China Sea.. nobody gets it right... most are surprised at the truth. The South China sea is 30% larger than the Med. It is a huge resource/ land/ sea grab... don't be foolish or fooled. Taiwan is merely the other shore...