To clarify, I don't believe in the surface level propaganda thrown in China's way about "1984 dystopian society," "Mao killed 60 million people," "Xinjiang concentration camps" or things like that.
I'm curious about a few negative factors of China that have become widespread knowledge over the past decade or so by even the politically literate audience, and I want to learn how accurate these things are, how prevalent they are in today's society in China, and how much it would impact the day to day life of someone living in China.
-
Quality control, I have read stories about Chinese factories producing guns, steel, industrial goods, consumer goods, food products, far below acceptable or safe standards, leading to construction/infrastructure failure and severe health complications. There are also claims that smaller restaurants in China today still sometimes use very low quality ingredients that can result in serious health issues. How much of an issue is this?
-
Population issue. The Chinese population trend is going in a unfavorable direction right now, and there are reports of young people not wanting to have children because of cultural and cost reasons. How much of an issue is this, and will China end up like Korea and Japan in another decade or two?
-
Unemployment, it is a fact right now that Chinese people have a 20% unemployment issue due to an abundance of university graduates without sufficient jobs to match this supply. And this has caused internal competition to swell to unreasonable standards leading some people to straight up give up on their careers and become full time neets. Are there any positive trends or actions to resolve this issue?
-
Education. The education system sounds terrifying in China right now, children as young as elementary schoolers having to sleep only 6 hours a night to finish their homework from school and tutoring services. I have also read that after the government banned tutoring of core classroom subjects, illegal tutoring services have become a thing. I would laugh at how this would be the most asian issue ever if I wasn't so horrified by the situation. Is there any government effort to resolve this right now?
-
Nepotism. From what I have heard and read, using connections to obtain positions and resources in China is still very common. How bad is this, and are there any reforms or policies tackling it?
-
Mannerisms and emotional intelligence of the average person. There are frequent complaints about Chinese people being horrible tourists, being extremely rude, having the emotional maturity of a donut until at least the age of 30, and also taking advantage of anything free to disgusting levels (I have personally seen old Chinese ladies take out a container and fill it with ketchup from a restaurant where the condiments are self served). I understand the reasoning behind this, China in it's current iteration is a relatively new country, and the education received by different generations varies massively in quality, with only really Gen Z on average obtaining a level of education that is on par with western populations. I just want to ask how bad this is in day to day life, and if it is tolerable.
Thanks for reading my somewhat long post, I'd appreciate any response, you don't have to respond to all of my points, any point would be fine. I want to have a positive impression of China but these points are really bugging me right now.
Thanks for pinging me @[email protected] (sounds like what people on Zhihu, the Chinese Quora, would say).
Points 1/5/6 about quality control, nepotism and mannerisms are about the same thing, that is whether you can generalize a few bad eggs to the entire group. My personal experience isn't going to be the same as someone next door, let alone someone from a different province, so the right place to look for answers is in statistics. I've heard the things you mentioned in these three points at least a decade ago, things have definitely become better is what I can tell you.
Point 2 about population, I'm part of the "young people who do not ~~want to~~ have kids", I strikeout the want to because I don't think people who don't want kids really mean it. I'm not a population expert so I'll pass on trying to estimate population numbers. Personally I think the cost of raising kids that some people mention mostly refers to the quality of education (which I'll mention below in point 4), and cost of living.
Point 3 about unemployment. "20% unemployment" is bogus talking point cooked up by Chinese liberal economists, here's the actual statistic they conjured this "data" from: http://www.stats.gov.cn/english/PressRelease/202307/t20230715_1941276.html
To anyone who can read, 21.3% unemployment refers to a narrow range of people from ages 16 to 24, but some liberals intentionally generalized it into the entire working population. Some economists went further and found a way to turn this 21.3% into around 50% unemployment.
Point 4 about education. Due to the large population of students and not enough resources to go around, there is definitely fierce competition among parents who want a better future for their kids. Note that I mention parents and not students, because I don't think most kids have the mental capacity or experience to understand what a better future is. Some parents go the extra mile and pay for tutoring outside of school to try to improve their kids' grades, this is understandable. But if all parents think like this, it's just going to come down to who is rich enough to employ better tutors on the market. Families who are not as well-off won't be able to compete if they also try to find tutors for their children. This is one of the reasons why tutoring for core subjects is banned, because the quality of education should not depend on how much capital a family can muster. There are also policies to reduce the amount of homework from school, can't comment on the effects as I don't have kids.
You don't need to have a positive impression of China, you can come here personally to see for yourself if you haven't, then form your own conclusions.
Um, some people really don't want kids, not because of economics, but because they don't want them at all.
About points 1 and 5, are there any of the aforementioned statistics that could paint a quantitative response regarding the issue? I understand China is working to address these issues, I am interested in how effective these measures are and how much it has improved.
I understand the unemployment issue better now from some other comments and gave my responses there.
About point 2 and 4, correct me if I'm misinterpreting your response, but so far these issues are connected because although Chinese families might want kids, the educational costs attached make this impossible for some?
I agree that banning the tutoring classes was a correct choice, however the emergence of illegal tutoring services and their popularity does paint a rather frustrating truth about the difficulty to resolve this issue, that is the inherent competitiveness of Chinese culture amongst the parents of this generation makes this issue very complicated, which is corroborated by your explanation of the issue.
And if this is the case, wouldn't this be a deadlock of parents not being able to afford raising children because of the educational costs, and the educational costs being so high because of the academic pressure parents put on their children? That sounds like a clusterfuck, does the CPC have any ideas on how to resolve this right now?
There are certainly statistics about overall quality of products from the manufacturing industry, but I think it's too broad to be very useful. For example, from this year's statistical communique (http://www.stats.gov.cn/english/PressRelease/202302/t20230227_1918979.html):
For more specific statistics you'd need a more specific question. About nepotism, the campaign against corruption has some statistics but I don't think there's a way to quantitatively reflect on the issue of nepotism.
On educational costs, this is a manufactured need as public education from kindergarten to grade 12 is practically free in China, and university costs are almost practically free. Now private education is where things can become very expensive as you can imagine, this includes private schools and private tutoring.
Some parents think that expensive private schools offer better quality of education, or think that they are better alternatives to some low-par public schools, but I think they just cost more. Private tutoring isn't just about core subjects, some parents may also want to enroll their kids into arts/tech/sports/etc. training classes, that's where some of that imaginary educational costs come from too. Unless private education is banned, this non-issue of educational costs will still be a problem for competitive parents.
I didn't go too much into the cost of living, but the cost of housing may be the main concern for parents who want to enroll kids into schools in the mega-cities (e.g. Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen), but this is also a nuanced topic.
I guess I'll need to do more research on the manufacturing and nepotism issues, thanks for giving me a starting point with the links you have provided.
About the manufactured cost of education. I completely understand the argument if we're talking about extracurricular topics. However if we are talking about core curricular topics, if private tutoring is a thing, even if only existing in the realm of illegal services, what is stopping teachers from moving part of the curriculum behind a paid wall? And then with the competitive nature of Chinese culture and the Gaokao system, wouldn't that inevitably spiral into it being necessary to enroll your kids in these financially predatory programs just to keep up and have a chance of getting into a good university?
I heard teachers from public schools were "moving part of the curriculum behind a paid wall" before the ban on tutoring for core subjects. Teachers in public schools aren't allowed to participate in private tutoring, that didn't stop some teachers from trying anyway. What you are talking about is not a just possibility, it has already happened before, and is mitigated with the ban and other policies.
Forgot to mention, even though teachers in public schools can't participate in private tutoring, there's no stopping them from joining private schools if the salaries offered are more lucrative.
Could you say more about the cost of university? How much would it cost a Chinese citizen to get a degree, for example? Does it depend on the province or course?
As an example, for the top 2 prestigious universities in China, Tsinghua University and Beijing University, most courses cost 5000 RMB/year and dormitories cost around 1000 RMB/year, which adds up to 24,000 RMB for a 4-year course.
To put that into perspective, here's a list of the minimum wage for all regions in China (Chinese text): http://www.mohrss.gov.cn/SYrlzyhshbzb/laodongguanxi_/fwyd/202307/t20230703_502349.html. They range from 1420 RMB to 2690 RMB, so the total cost of 24,000 RMB will require 9 to 17 months of minimum wage income depending on the region.
Thanks!
With some heavy guess work, I can work out some of the table. Fun! Does 小时 mean hourly? (Literally, 'little part'?)
That's maybe more than I'd expect. Still better than many places in the west. A place at a top US school might cost $200k+ once everything is factored in. A lot more than minimum wage. I suppose people going to the top Chinese schools are expecting to get paid a lot more than minimum wage, too?
I imagine less prestigious schools in China are cheaper? And a direct comparison with the west world consider how predatory the loans are. For example, borrowing the equivalent of one year's minimum wage in the US could mean paying a stealth tax forever if minimum monthly payments only convert the interest and if a worker only has a small amount of 'spare' cash for overpayments because their rent is so high. Is there a general sense that paying for higher education is 'affordable' in China?
小时 means "hour", so in this case it means hourly. I use minimum wage as a baseline, but you can compare using per capita disposable income instead (English data source: http://www.stats.gov.cn/english/PressRelease/202301/t20230118_1892303.html). Yes most people who've been to any form of university are expected to earn more than just minimum wage.
The cost of courses in public schools varies by region and is set by the local government, I would say 4000 RMB/year is a safe estimate on the minimum fee.
Students can also apply for student loans in China. I'm not familiar with the topic but here's a short news article from 2021 that covers the basics: http://english.scio.gov.cn/pressroom/2021-09/15/content_77753922.htm
Note that the last line I quoted mentions 36.7 million students, I'm pretty sure that includes students from all previous years since the total number of students in undergraduate and graduate schools currently amount to 40 million.
As for whether higher education is "affordable" in the general sense, here's a quote from the same article:
Just to add a little more context to the public/private school divide in China.
1a. There are also private schools that are inside public schools that give the students both a graduation certificate from a local public high school and a more international education in programs like the IB, A-levels (Cambridge, Oxford, Edexcel, etc.), AP, among other bespoke curriculums.
2a. In order to be eligible for the Gao Kao, the student must have also passed the Zhong Kao (The public high school entrance exam)
While the tuition for university may seem like not much to a person used to the costs in the west, it can be burdensome to many locals in the PRC. Here's a few (articles in Chinese) examples of students losing all their tuition, sometimes leading to unfortunate results.
There are also schools that students without a local Hukou (household registration) can enter, but I'm not familiar with that side of education.
4a. A parent can get a new Hukou for their child by buying an apartment in a new city, and other options depending on the municipality.
4b. There is talk of some Hukou reforms in large east-coast cities, but we'll have to wait and see what exactly changes
I know you've qualified it, but I'd be cautious of this kind of thing:
Seems like the kind of framing that could lead to some problematic conclusions/questions.
I have friends who say this about their parents (they are international students or have settled down in a different country after obtaining citizenship).
What would you respond to that? I would think about disqualifying the 'Chinese culture' part of it as it can be a bit universal, but I wouldn't want to invalidate their experience. So I'm a bit lost on how to interpret and inverse and it.
I'd perhaps say that just because someone is Chinese doesn't necessarily mean that what they say about China or anything else is correct by virtue of ethnicity/nationality/citizenship. Someone from China is obviously going to know a lot more about China than the average westerner (standpoint epistemology – knowledge gained from experience).
That doesn't mean a westerner can't know something about China that someone from China knows or doesn't know. Even if they avoid book worship, some investigation can be textual, for example. In the same way, a Canadian from BC won't know things about Newfoundland but a Chinese researcher might.
Additionally, a generalisation is still a generalisation. I don't know the exact demographics, but is it possible to make a generalisation that is even broadly true about, say, 700 million people (everyone in China above a certain age)? In a place where – like most other places but likely unique in ways due to its development – there are such differences between urban and rural populations and along borders bordering rather different places?
This generalisation in particular seems problematic because it seems to rely in a strange way on the notion of 'human nature'. Albeit a human nature that is only shared among a narrow group (which, again, isn't that narrow as it must number hundreds of millions).
It's the 'inherent' part that troubles me most. It suggests (a) that every person in China of a certain age will be competitive and (b) this trait is by virtue of their ethnicity/nationality/'culture'. I just can't see it. Plus the latter is racist/orientalist. The OP's qualification, which I thought was okay, was that it's generational. I'd argue that generational generalisations (that's a mouthful, sorry) are flawed, too, but they're not necessarily racist/orientalist.
If Chinese people say the elder generation is culturally different to the younger… well, my response would depend on the context. It doesn't seem to be an outrageous claim. But if a westerner repeats that Chinese people (of a particular generation? I'm unsure about that part) are inherently anything due to their culture… it would raise red flags. And not the good type. Again, I think the OP suitably qualified what they were saying.
If I were speaking with someone from China and they said that, I'd be more curious than anything else, I think. I'd want to ask about the generational changes and their causes. I'd want to ask whether the party neglected the elder generation(s) and why. Again, it would depend on the context. If they were a liberal making liberal claims, I'd challenge their liberalism. Otherwise, I'd probably ask the same questions that I'd ask of anyone making claims about inherent features, culture, etc, knowing that someone from China will likely be able to tell me more than a westerner on this topic.
For a generalisation of my own, I'd assume that some (many? most? a few? I don't know the stats) of Chinese foreign students in the west are children of 'middle-class' families whose parents could afford to pay for private tuition, etc. If this is who you're talking to, their views will reflect their class position. I can't see the same kind of competitiveness and approach among those families who have only recently been lifted out of poverty (which is roughly half the population – not the same half from above).
The children at a private school in the west might also think that 'every' parent is hyper-competitive about their children with extra tuition and classes, etc. If they grew up and went to another country, how accurate of a picture could they paint for their hosts? If they're the son of a wealthy Australian wine maker, how much of the culture/attitude could they realistically tell of the life of indigenous people or of poor white settlors?
They won't have direct experience of all Australian life. But redtea, you reject standpoint epistemology! Indeed, the Australian wine-heir could get knowledge about other aspects of Australian life from other sources, but how likely is that of, say, a 20-year old undergraduate who hasn't yet learned, say, sociology because they went to study that in Massachusetts?
Now if made the example a bit more specific and were talking about the culture among a certain sub-set of parents of a certain income with certain jobs (or not-jobs), etc, much of my critique might not apply. Because that would use 'culture' in a different way to how I interpreted it here initially.
EDIT: Sorry, I do go off on one sometimes!
Not at all, thanks for the substantial reply. The bit about being curious I think is very key, it's what I'll try to keep in mind moving forward.