Bill, I have a question not specific to today’s column but generally. If you were asked how does China sees itself in its relationship with US, how would you answer that question? I just finished listening to discussion by Amb Bob Blackwill re his excellent CFR report on US China relationship. There were many helpful and worthy insights from US perspective but I would like to know how Chinese explain the relationship to themselves and each other. Thank you. Marsha Vande Berg/San Francisco
the pottinger commen re huawei is very worrying if it reflects truely the basis of US huawei policy. for it is a classic rationalising narrative of someone in denial, using tangential generalities to avoid/overrride hard specific facts.
i happen to know european companies/colleagues who work with huawei as their clients or outsourced colleagues. the constant theme of their comments is how huawei engineers work crazy hours and have no concern for their own sleep/health/private lives and undoubtedly care far more about delivering what the clients want than their competitors (maybe to an unreasonable degree). this is especially astonishing and unbelievable to europeans. and this is i suspect a large element of how huawei is competitive. one can fault huawei and indeed chinese companies and even chinese individuals for competing 'unfairly' by not observing (voluntarily or under sticks and carrots) human/labour 'norms'. indeed isnt this a theme ever since the 19th century and was at the root of the original anti-chinese riots in north america (that chinese labourers undercut other immigrant labourers by simply willing to do more for less)? such a tradition has nothing to do with politics and even less, government subsidies.
surely as all of us believers of neoliberal capitalism know well that goverment subsidy produces fat cronies who r good at gaming the sysyem.and.nothing.else. it can only destroy huawei and.china, surely?
and then to cast all that into a narrative of politically motivated dishonesty and theft as a way to explain away the very real competitions posed by China on multiple fronts? isnt it all too convenient? it is also dangerous in many ways, not the least to America. For if the diagnosis to an ill is rubbish, then the cure is most likely to be rubbish.
if the solution to any unwanted change were simply to destory that change and hope to carry on exactly as before, then the course of human history and developments would have been very different.
Bill, I have a question not specific to today’s column but generally. If you were asked how does China sees itself in its relationship with US, how would you answer that question? I just finished listening to discussion by Amb Bob Blackwill re his excellent CFR report on US China relationship. There were many helpful and worthy insights from US perspective but I would like to know how Chinese explain the relationship to themselves and each other. Thank you. Marsha Vande Berg/San Francisco
the pottinger commen re huawei is very worrying if it reflects truely the basis of US huawei policy. for it is a classic rationalising narrative of someone in denial, using tangential generalities to avoid/overrride hard specific facts.
i happen to know european companies/colleagues who work with huawei as their clients or outsourced colleagues. the constant theme of their comments is how huawei engineers work crazy hours and have no concern for their own sleep/health/private lives and undoubtedly care far more about delivering what the clients want than their competitors (maybe to an unreasonable degree). this is especially astonishing and unbelievable to europeans. and this is i suspect a large element of how huawei is competitive. one can fault huawei and indeed chinese companies and even chinese individuals for competing 'unfairly' by not observing (voluntarily or under sticks and carrots) human/labour 'norms'. indeed isnt this a theme ever since the 19th century and was at the root of the original anti-chinese riots in north america (that chinese labourers undercut other immigrant labourers by simply willing to do more for less)? such a tradition has nothing to do with politics and even less, government subsidies.
surely as all of us believers of neoliberal capitalism know well that goverment subsidy produces fat cronies who r good at gaming the sysyem.and.nothing.else. it can only destroy huawei and.china, surely?
and then to cast all that into a narrative of politically motivated dishonesty and theft as a way to explain away the very real competitions posed by China on multiple fronts? isnt it all too convenient? it is also dangerous in many ways, not the least to America. For if the diagnosis to an ill is rubbish, then the cure is most likely to be rubbish.
if the solution to any unwanted change were simply to destory that change and hope to carry on exactly as before, then the course of human history and developments would have been very different.