One of my best ‘finds’ this year has been the Sinica podcast. At last – a podcast discussing current affairs in China in an objective fashion, with hosts that clearly understand China.

Some rights reserved by spakattacks

For the first 18 or so episodes, I’ve agreed with everything they’ve said. Well not every single thing – there have been moments when I’ve said "Hang on, what about … ?" to my mp3 player. In each case however, one of the hosts subsequently chipped in and raised my point. As a result, I’ve developed a healthy respect for both the hosts and the show.

With the recent episode discussing China Apologists (or Panda Huggers), I found myself not quite agreeing with the host for the first time – so here are my thoughts on the issue. The discussion centered around an article written by Shaun Rein and ‘responses’ on The Peking Duck and A Modern Lei Feng. I’m not going to rehash these articles, but they form the background to this rather rambling post on the topic.

Definition Of A China Apologist

First, what is a China Apologist? Where is the line that, once crossed, sees someone who is Pro China become a China Apologist?

The podcast hosts discussed a variety of indicators, but they didn’t agree on an exact definition. What they did agree is that it’s a complex and subjective issue – one person’s definition can be very different from another’s.

Still, from the discussion around the criteria, I made a frightening discovery – I suspect many would consider me a China Apologist!

Help I Think I’m An China Apologist!

Let me present the evidence against me.

First, check out my Speilberg Wrong To Withdraw From Beijing Olympics post. I mention Guantanamo bay amongst other things, which is one of the markers laid down by Kaiser. I do put in the disclaimer "There’s no doubt that China does have issues – some big ones", but then ruin it with "but so does every country".

Second, I’ve been known to defend the Chinese government in conversation, saying things like "You’ve got to remember that they are governing a country with 1.3 billion people, a huge gap between rich and poor, a raft of social issues, local government that does it’s own thing, etc – it’s not easy to maintain stability". I do put the standard disclaimer that the country has some huge issues, but I don’t push it – there’s enough written about the huge issues elsewhere.

Finally, I failed the Google Test. My reaction wasn’t "Yay Google". It was "Way to go Google, now you’ve forced China to push back even if they don’t want to". I don’t quite see how anyone who understands China could expect Google to actually achieve anything by their move.

Oh shit, now I’m being condescending – that seals it, I’m a Panda Hugger. But you know what, if that’s the case, then I’m not ashamed of it! Or to borrow a line from Jeremy Goldkorn: "Fuck you all"!

Now that I’ve destroyed the PG rating of my site, I’m going to explain why I think a dash of Apologism isn’t necessarily a bad thing.

First, A Disclaimer

The podcast hosts are all well known in China circles. I’m not well known or influential, nor do I know others who are. While there’s probably a reasonable overlap in our experiences of China, for the most part my experiences were in a different sphere:

• I wasn’t really part of an expat community.
• I didn’t live in one of the major cities (although I was only a couple of hours away, that seems to be a big difference).
• I wasn’t involved in the news or media industries as many of the podcast hosts are, I was teaching (English and ICT).
• I’m married to a Chinese national and we have kids, which greatly affected my experiences in China.

This article is based on my experience in China. I accept that parts it may not match with others’ experience of China.

Also, importantly, I’m a blogger, not a journalist. I make the distinction, although there is a real blurring of the lines these days. I have different standards to uphold: It means I can get away with making generalizations and presenting opinion, rather than focusing on the factual details. 🙂

And, well, okay, maybe I more than just hugged the Panda. I’m not just defending China, I’m protecting my kids. I don’t want to have to explain to them why the media in their father’s homeland is so critical of their mother’s homeland. I want there to be an increase in understanding of China by the West, so that my kids will have an easier life.

Shaun Rein’s Response

Shaun gave an audio postcard in the podcast, defending his position and arguing that he’s not a China Apologist. I’m not going to go over his defence in detail, but it’s worth a quick mention. I don’t agree with everything Shaun said, especially the detail. For example, I can’t agree with his statement on real poverty having been eradicated.

I know when I first came to China, I was struck by how many of the people I met, although genuinely poor, were actually happier than us materialistic Westerners. And although living in squalid conditions, they all seemed to have enough food.

However, the illusion of people being happy in poverty disappears when you know people who can’t get the medical treatment they need because they can’t afford it. How many people die because they can’t afford basic medical treatment? Whether that’s a problem with the medical system rather than real poverty isn’t something I’m interested in arguing about – if that’s happening, then there’s a problem.

Anyway, although I don’t agree with the details of Shaun’s defense, I do agree with the broader issues that he outlines:

• Credit to the government where it’s due
• The big stick won’t lead to reform
• Things are slowly improving

I believe these are all true, but I’m going to briefly explore the second of these, as it’s the one that most encourages my Apologist tendencies.

The Big Stick

Let me digress for a moment:

Back in 2002, when I’d only been in China for several months, a new foreign teacher arrived at our school in Guangdong. We took him down to one of our favourite restaurants for dinner. While we were eating, some Chinese men were smoking at the table next to us. Our new companion leant across, tapped one of the men on the shoulder and said something like "Would you mind not smoking. Don’t you know it can kill you?". He said this in English. The reaction from the Chinese men? They looked at him briefly, then ignored him and continued smoking.

After a couple of minutes, our companion tapped the man on the shoulder again and berated him again. Did it work? No, he was ignored even harder. Yes, I do mean ignored even harder. The men weren’t sure what to make of him, but they sure weren’t going to do anything that even acknowledged him.

So what does this have to do with the current discussion on Apologists?

For those of you who want to tap China on the shoulder and tell them to stop it, do you really think it’s going to work? If so, do you understand China at all?

Oops, I’m generalizing and being condescending again. Actually, I accept that the people on the podcast know many aspects of China better than me – but come on, I mean when has this approach ever really worked in China? Okay, it does work occasionally, but:

• not on really important issues;
• if it does work, you normally pay for it later; and
• it’s just not the best way to get things done in China.

Not to mention that I find it incredibly rude. When I see this behaviour (and I see it all the time towards China), then I feel an urge to jump in and help the person, or in this case country, that’s under attack, even if I don’t agree with that they’re doing.

I understand people’s desires to make China more accountable, to help it improve, but I don’t think shouting at them is going to change anything – and it may be actually be detrimental in many cases.

There are better ways to deal with China: to work quietly behind the scenes, show them the benefits of change, etc. Okay, I’m aware that these are generalizations and I’m not in a position to actually do this – whereas I am in a position to shout at them, but I genuinely don’t think that’s going to help at all.

The Main Point: Who Are You Talking To?

So we’re nearing my main point. Forget all my other arguments if you like. This is the big one, the one I wanted to hear discussed on the podcast:

Who is your audience? Who are you talking to?

Let’s take Forbes, which is who Shaun Rein writes for. I obviously don’t have access to the web analytics data for Shaun’s articles, but I would suspect that the number of readers is ordered something like this:

1. People in North America = by far the largest group
2. People in other English speaking countries (UK, Australia, NZ)
3. People in non English speaking countries in Europe
4. People in China:
   • The expat community (by far the largest sub group)
   • The Chinese people

Oh, I’m sure that the Chinese government monitors what the Western media says and will pick up on articles criticising them. But as I mentioned before, I don’t think that’s going to help much.

And yes, I’m sure that some of the Chinese people will read these articles and it may help them form their own opinion. But I’m not convinced that the percentage of Chinese people reading it will be enough to facilitate change.

But whether they are listening or not is not the point. If you’re writing for either the Chinese government or the mainstream Chinese people, you are ignoring your main audience: average Westerners.

Writing For The Average Westerner

Have you ever travelled back home and overheard someone say something totally incorrect about China? How did you feel? Did you correct them or bite your tongue? I bet everyone on the Podcast, indeed every foreigner who’s lived in China, has gone through that at some point. I bet most would like to change the such points of view and spread understanding of China.

So what’s the best way educate the average Westerner about the real China? Through the media – including news sites and blogs.

What sort of opinion of China is the average person going to get if it’s all negative, beating China with a stick? Probably not far from where we are now. Mainstream views in the West are often one sided. For example, go to Yahoo! Answers and do a search for "China job". At the time of writing many of the entries were about people worried about American jobs being lost to China:

I’m not commenting on this particular topic, nor am I saying that these concerns aren’t valid, just demonstrating that the average person in the West has concerns about China: in this case about American jobs being lost to China. What I am saying is that it’s important that people in the West have a balanced understanding of China.

Right now, many people are predisposed to believe the negative about China. That’s mostly what they hear. They don’t have the understanding of China that first hand experience gives. They can only go by what they read and hear. They deserve access to information about the positive side of China.

It’s not the end of the world if people occasionally cross the line in an attempt to present the other side of the argument. It’s not as though people aren’t constantly crossing the line in the other direction all the time. If that’s all people see, then negative views of China will remain in the ascendance.

I know this won’t go down well with people who are frustrated with China and who want to change it. I know it won’t go down well with those who have journalistic integrity to maintain. But remember, you’re not just speaking to China, you’re speaking to the world. Don’t hold back with criticism of China where it’s deserved (as it so often is), but give China some love too where it’s merited, even if it means you cross that line from time to time.

If your main audience is the West, don’t waste time swinging an ineffective big stick that’s not really helping promote change, just reinforcing the divide between China and West (and making you feel good). Put the big stick away and use your influence to try to bring the two cultures closer.

If you can’t do that, then at least don’t jump all over someone who’s trying.

Final Thoughts

So yeah, I hugged the Panda and I’ll keep on hugging it. What’s more, I think more people should hug it as well. Promoting the other side of the argument, increasing understanding – these can’t be bad things.

So what if we slip over the line into being a China Apologist from time to time? That’s not any worse than being too hard on China and presenting a distorted view of China to people in the West, which just permeates misunderstanding between countries.

I’m sure many will think my reasoning is flawed or I’ve missed the point. If so, let me know in the comments!