Absolutely fascinating, thank you. Look forward to reading more. Zhan Youbing's brooding pictures honestly blew me away, they're exquisite. A perfect 'marriage' of text and image. Blessings.
Hi Jeremy, maybe there’s potentially comparative work btw the two countries in the future. Despite the obvious differences, the US and China seem to share many national characteristics.
For me (American expat in Germany), it’s unthinkable to put such pressure on my kids about their relationships and personal choices. Fascinating to try to imagine thriving in this culture so different from mine
excellent question. In my short post I highlighted the concerns of the Chinese government over 'leftover men'. (In the podcast episode, we explore how the government's fear-messaging about 'leftover women' is less of a concern about women and more a concern about the unmarried men.) But no. While the fears of the government are centered around male unmarried migrants, there are many women who work in the factories (you can see their photos in this post).
Though there is some degree of fears around male unmarried migrants, my understanding is the center of Chinese government propaganda is really anti-individualism.
There is always a mismatch between policies made by executive branch and propaganda from party. In this case policies from executive branch (to solve the leftover men issue) are focused on redistribution of resources to rural areas while the party treats highly educated unmarried women as a sign of individualism.
The current CCP Politburo, Wang Huning, who overseeing CCP's propaganda is fairly skeptical of individualism from his early academic work. It's not a surprise that state medias are more aggressive towards any action can be interpreted as individualism.
That’s right: both male and female in the rural migrant community, which numbers in total at 280 millions. My previous work shows that construction workers tend to be mostly male, domestic workers mostly female, and factory workers both male and female.
I may have missed it but I wonder if the ethnographer has considered the part that Chance plays in “decisions of the heart” or “good” vs “bad decisions in love”? In the West, Chance seems to play a large part in our sense of how “the right one” emerges, but I suspect that class, education levels, political bias are among the many variables that “pollute” the rose-colored notion of “being lucky in love.” Your thoughts welcome.
Yes, great point Bobby. In the podcast, we explore that for many in China, the concepts of "love" and "marriage" are separate for the reasons you say. (latter is more about compatibility of class/education level than about "love"). Although on the other hand, there was a recent episode of Freakonomics that you'll probably enjoy. It's all about how Western marriage patterns have a lot more to do with class / education / and other groupings than we like to imagine from our love stories! https://freakonomics.com/podcast/why-did-you-marry-that-person-replay/
This is the anti-China propaganda by one of those who pretend to be "China experts". It is true that many government policies are very different from the West, and probably viewed as "harsh" from a relative angle. But the lack of depth of those "China experts" fail to explain that many of the "harsh" policies allow China to deal with many historic horrible economic planning mistakes -- e.g. such as the population explosion created by Mao, which led to the decades of one-child policy, or the hu kao policy to manage a never-before-seen rapid pace of growth in an emerging country. And amongst the extremely high challenges, China managed to bring 800 million people out of poverty. Harsh from the angle of people in the West born with silver spoons in their mouths? Yes, absolutely. But has this "China expert" been able to overview the history, cause and effects of the policies that have brought vastly improved lives to a huge number of people? No, this is another "China expert" that smears, and not explain.
Imagine, you are a member of the central government of China, you arrive the scene with the population explosion created by Mao, the after math of the society-destroying effects of the Cultural Revoluation from Mao's reign, is it possible to implement no "harsh" policy and achieve the miracles that followed? Read some history. Read the numbers. Think with commonsense.
My great grandfather went to America and was part of the migrant workers that helped built the railroads. He was not allowed to stay. The Chinese Exclusion Act, the very first law in the World to target and discriminate an ethnic group, was created in America. Try to learn history from a non-biased view. Americans love to sweep their horrific acts under the carpet.
Have you seen workers, coming out of a factory to the dining hall for lunch, holding hands, skipping and running and laughing? When I saw guys holding hands, not because of relaionship, but because they are good buddies, I was touched by how happy and simple life sometimes was. Did many of them eventually had to return to their home towns? Probably, sure. But many of them were also able to establish hu kao in Shenzhen, the most advanced city in China. There is no other way you can explain the rapid population growth of SZ: many migrant workers were able to stay, just like a young person who moved from Kansas to establish a career in New York City. "China experts" BS. But numbers don't lie; "China experts" do. A decade ago, "China experts" kissed the Chinese ass every which way, because it was the hip thing to do, the readers/audience wanted it; nowadays, "China experts" twist everything to smear China.
Many of the "China experts" article rely heavily on a premise the the Western reader eat up with zero questioning: assuming that the Chinese people are stupid and easily manipulated. Oh poor poor Chinese people who don't know anything. Yeah, right. The people who believe the BS from the "China experts" are the one who are truly stupid. Have you ever met a huge group of people mind-controlled by their government? Yes, that is called America, they assume other people are stupid.
Go to China to see for yourselves. Read actually what Xi Jinping has written. Yes, Xi Jinping has published articles openly available on the web, but have your "China experts" ever sent you that link so you can read it yourself using Google Translate? No. They make predictions based on how many days Xi didn't show up on national TV. Don't trust the "China experts" who makes predictions based on BS. The numbers need to add up. How else can you explain the advanced cities that are built in just three decades? By stupid people? Ha ha!
Yes. In the podcast episode linked above, producer Jess Jiang talks about her feelings about this term. it's definitely meant to humiliate and warn. It's not neutral
Absolutely fascinating, thank you. Look forward to reading more. Zhan Youbing's brooding pictures honestly blew me away, they're exquisite. A perfect 'marriage' of text and image. Blessings.
Thanks again for featuring our insights here on inequality in China!
Hi Jeremy, maybe there’s potentially comparative work btw the two countries in the future. Despite the obvious differences, the US and China seem to share many national characteristics.
As a new student of Chinese culture, I am fascinated by your article and look forward to reading more. Thank you for the book references.
Looking forward to Love Commandos
For me (American expat in Germany), it’s unthinkable to put such pressure on my kids about their relationships and personal choices. Fascinating to try to imagine thriving in this culture so different from mine
Such a touching topic, podcast episode, questions.
My question: Are the migrant workers all male?
excellent question. In my short post I highlighted the concerns of the Chinese government over 'leftover men'. (In the podcast episode, we explore how the government's fear-messaging about 'leftover women' is less of a concern about women and more a concern about the unmarried men.) But no. While the fears of the government are centered around male unmarried migrants, there are many women who work in the factories (you can see their photos in this post).
Though there is some degree of fears around male unmarried migrants, my understanding is the center of Chinese government propaganda is really anti-individualism.
There is always a mismatch between policies made by executive branch and propaganda from party. In this case policies from executive branch (to solve the leftover men issue) are focused on redistribution of resources to rural areas while the party treats highly educated unmarried women as a sign of individualism.
The current CCP Politburo, Wang Huning, who overseeing CCP's propaganda is fairly skeptical of individualism from his early academic work. It's not a surprise that state medias are more aggressive towards any action can be interpreted as individualism.
That’s right: both male and female in the rural migrant community, which numbers in total at 280 millions. My previous work shows that construction workers tend to be mostly male, domestic workers mostly female, and factory workers both male and female.
I may have missed it but I wonder if the ethnographer has considered the part that Chance plays in “decisions of the heart” or “good” vs “bad decisions in love”? In the West, Chance seems to play a large part in our sense of how “the right one” emerges, but I suspect that class, education levels, political bias are among the many variables that “pollute” the rose-colored notion of “being lucky in love.” Your thoughts welcome.
Yes, great point Bobby. In the podcast, we explore that for many in China, the concepts of "love" and "marriage" are separate for the reasons you say. (latter is more about compatibility of class/education level than about "love"). Although on the other hand, there was a recent episode of Freakonomics that you'll probably enjoy. It's all about how Western marriage patterns have a lot more to do with class / education / and other groupings than we like to imagine from our love stories! https://freakonomics.com/podcast/why-did-you-marry-that-person-replay/
This is the anti-China propaganda by one of those who pretend to be "China experts". It is true that many government policies are very different from the West, and probably viewed as "harsh" from a relative angle. But the lack of depth of those "China experts" fail to explain that many of the "harsh" policies allow China to deal with many historic horrible economic planning mistakes -- e.g. such as the population explosion created by Mao, which led to the decades of one-child policy, or the hu kao policy to manage a never-before-seen rapid pace of growth in an emerging country. And amongst the extremely high challenges, China managed to bring 800 million people out of poverty. Harsh from the angle of people in the West born with silver spoons in their mouths? Yes, absolutely. But has this "China expert" been able to overview the history, cause and effects of the policies that have brought vastly improved lives to a huge number of people? No, this is another "China expert" that smears, and not explain.
Imagine, you are a member of the central government of China, you arrive the scene with the population explosion created by Mao, the after math of the society-destroying effects of the Cultural Revoluation from Mao's reign, is it possible to implement no "harsh" policy and achieve the miracles that followed? Read some history. Read the numbers. Think with commonsense.
My great grandfather went to America and was part of the migrant workers that helped built the railroads. He was not allowed to stay. The Chinese Exclusion Act, the very first law in the World to target and discriminate an ethnic group, was created in America. Try to learn history from a non-biased view. Americans love to sweep their horrific acts under the carpet.
Have you seen workers, coming out of a factory to the dining hall for lunch, holding hands, skipping and running and laughing? When I saw guys holding hands, not because of relaionship, but because they are good buddies, I was touched by how happy and simple life sometimes was. Did many of them eventually had to return to their home towns? Probably, sure. But many of them were also able to establish hu kao in Shenzhen, the most advanced city in China. There is no other way you can explain the rapid population growth of SZ: many migrant workers were able to stay, just like a young person who moved from Kansas to establish a career in New York City. "China experts" BS. But numbers don't lie; "China experts" do. A decade ago, "China experts" kissed the Chinese ass every which way, because it was the hip thing to do, the readers/audience wanted it; nowadays, "China experts" twist everything to smear China.
Many of the "China experts" article rely heavily on a premise the the Western reader eat up with zero questioning: assuming that the Chinese people are stupid and easily manipulated. Oh poor poor Chinese people who don't know anything. Yeah, right. The people who believe the BS from the "China experts" are the one who are truly stupid. Have you ever met a huge group of people mind-controlled by their government? Yes, that is called America, they assume other people are stupid.
Go to China to see for yourselves. Read actually what Xi Jinping has written. Yes, Xi Jinping has published articles openly available on the web, but have your "China experts" ever sent you that link so you can read it yourself using Google Translate? No. They make predictions based on how many days Xi didn't show up on national TV. Don't trust the "China experts" who makes predictions based on BS. The numbers need to add up. How else can you explain the advanced cities that are built in just three decades? By stupid people? Ha ha!
Thanks for opening our eyes in knowing the truth about inequality in china
How are they going to make out when war occurs?
I should have written “these cultures” (China and India)
“Leftover women” --such a distasteful term
Yes. In the podcast episode linked above, producer Jess Jiang talks about her feelings about this term. it's definitely meant to humiliate and warn. It's not neutral