China Is Waging a Very Effective Propaganda War

And it’s going to be difficult for us to fight back.

By
43

If there’s one thing worth knowing about China—in terms of geopolitics and American national security at least—it’s that its rulers are almost as afraid of the people as the people are afraid of them.

Think about it. Why would a government place secret cameras everywhere? Censor any criticism of the government? Mount massive propaganda campaigns to defend the infallibility of the ruling Communist Party? 

If the people were all in for their form of government and their way of life, this wouldn’t be necessary.

“In 2013 the party issued a list of seven topics that could no longer be discussed with students: universal values, a free press, civil society, civic rights, the party’s past ‘mistakes,’ corruption and an independent judiciary,” veteran China correspondent Isabel Hilton wrote in The Economist in 2018. “This speaks of fear rather than confidence.”

Create a free account
Access additional articles and newsletters for no cost, no credit card information needed. Continue ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
43
By
Comments (43)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Honest Question

    Why do you think this iteration of China's propaganda war will be "very effective"? I think you rightly note at the outset that China's massive propaganda campaigns have failed to bring its people "all in for their form of government" and the regime remains afraid of its own people.

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Logical

    While off topic, I thought the readers of the Dispatch may have fun with this and, hopefully, it is in the spirit of intellectual exploration of contemporary politics as intended by the founders of the Dispatch.

    I would like to present an alternative thesis on political alignments post Jim Crow/Civil Rights, starting with the era of Southern Strategy which spans from 1968 to present.

    At the outset, I would throw out the terminology of conservative and liberal ideologies. I believe they are purely for the purposes of tribe building and have negligible influence on the actual governance of the nation. These ideologies also provided livelihoods to think tanks and wing-driven blogs, books, conferences, etc. We consume ourselves with the contrasts and conflicts, but at the implementation level, they had very little influence. E.g., McConnell has been a good tribal leader; but does he give a damn about deficits or ideology of the judges? Likely not. Whatever works for his tribe is ok with him.

    The tribe building aspects are important. Whether a particular concept (e.g. abortion pro-choice vs. anti-choice) has inherent merits or not is irrelevant. If a particular agenda item happens to be adopted by one tribe, initiated through a random event or clever planning, the tribe passionately adopts it and will be consumed by it to the extent to (figuratively) die for it. To repeat: how a particular agenda item gets into the tribe is not relevant; but once it gets in, it will be guarded and defended by the tribe. Through early 2000s, there was some contamination of items in the tribes as the alignments are not complete, but most of the contamination is cleansed at this stage. Let us call these tribes GOP and DEM, neglecting the other smaller tribes.
    For additional clarity, I pick two lists, not meant to be exhaustive but rather as examples:

    GOP LIST
    Philosophy --- Individual Responsibility, Fiscal Discipline, and Strong Defense
    Agenda Items --- Anti-choice, Unlimited Gun Rights, Voter Id, Minimally Regulated Business, Adequate but not Punishing Environmental Regulations

    DEM LIST
    Philosophy --- Justice and Racial Equality, Equitable Sharing of Wealth
    Agenda Items--- Pro-Choice, Restriction of Guns, Unconstrained Access to Voting, Control of Global Warming

    A minor detour on Global Warming: while I consider myself in the DEM tribe, I do not believe there is anything humans can do to change the course of events. Warming is real; but the earth’s cycles are earth’s cycles and the role of humans on the cycles is highly questionable. Having said that, I would like to live in a world with lush forests, clean waters, and renewable energy sources to preserve limited fossil fuels. So, while the patient is not sick, I am ok with the medicine. It is also helpful to my tribe because, if we can turn this into religion --- i.e, faith driven --- logic would vanish and tribal alliance gets very strong.

    With this as an introduction, I would present to you a controversial (and potentially incendiary ) view of our politics at the root level. “Root Level” is meant to be the base instincts of the tribe, for survival and growth.

    The two tribes are formed from four groups classified as follows:
    1. Whites: not too concerned with historical privileges/power/advantages disappearing
    2. Whites: afraid of losing the historical privileges/power/advantages (i.e.. MAGA)
    3. Non-Whites: aligned with group 1 for governance
    4. Non-Whites: aligned with group 2 for governance

    Please keep in mind that most everything in life is a bell curve (normal distribution per math geeks). So these are the lumpy center parts of the groups with long tail ends and overlaps.
    Right now, the DEM tribe is comprised of 1+3 and the GOP tribe is comprised of 2+4. The DEM tribe has slight numerical advantage as we speak, but the land-mass superiority granted by the Constitution gives the GOP a significant advantage in the Senate and a slight advantage to the position of POTUS.

    But the coalitions/alliances can shift. Nothing is a given. Frankly, while we all can guess, we can never be certain about how things will turnout, especially after the shock of Covid-19 wears off.
    Our future thus will depend on the numerical strength and alliances of these four groups.

    We may envision some new scenarios:
    Right now 3 and 4 are relying on 1 or 2 for alliance. If, at some point they create a third tribe with plurality, then balkanization of USA would be complete. It may prompt 1+2 alliance.
    If a 1+2 tribe develops, then for a time being the status of 3+4 would be similar to muslims in India.

    There may be additional tribal splits and more tribes; if so, at some point, while antithetical to the Constitution, a de facto parliamentary democracy becomes inevitable. I’ll leave it to the good people of the Dispatch tribe to have fun with such scenarios.

    Collapse
  3. Scott Mc

    Jonah, so happy to see you desire to stand up for something and hope you come up with some answers because you are seriously a talented mind. We are better off hearing those ideas so we can champion them rather than using much of your valuable talent to tell us what we know about the administration and the style of the POTUS. Points taken long ago, please pivot to your creative ideas. You are a gold mine that is funny as well as smart, give us more. With all due respect sincerely.

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Visibly

    Can we accept that we are at war against C19? Unfortunately for us, we have allowed China to produce a vast fraction of critical products. So, let us make a decision that we have a strategi to make sure that essentials products can be provided by US in the future.
    And that we now collaborate, rather than blame China, so they can help us getting the right equipments and materials.

    Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    Logical

    Pick the villain in this story. Specific names withheld on purpose.

    In the mid 90's I used to be a research manager, developing components using a very specific insulator-metal seal for medical devices. The underlying technology was developed in the 1930's by DoD for high reliability electrical seals in weapon systems, and improved over decades. Probably several hundred million in todays $ invested on R&D over this period by DoD. Since our application was no longer DoD related, we had no business with DoD. Our firm was small but niche. As an expert, I claim this technology cannot be readily reverse engineered.

    We had revenue misses, struggled a bit, but still mildly profitable. A famous PE firm bought us. Within 9 months, the shop transferred to near Shanghai. It changed hands and eventually merged now with a large Chinese medical equipment firm. To the best of my knowledge, they are the only ones making it now.

    Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Paul Montagu

    If we're going to call it anything, then let it be the Xi Virus because it should be laid at the feet of the Chinese premier, not a geographic location. Xi is the one responsible for jailing doctors and for trotting out the lie that there were no new cases from January 11 to 17 and for trafficking in bogus propaganda.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Visibly

      Yes, agree. But China is an authorian regime with limits on human rights and free press. So why did US behave as China denying everything, knowing for a full 3 months what was about to come? Or more specifically, why did the President?

      Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Kevin Johnson

    Jonah, I’m a bit unclear as to how you reach your conclusion, and not entirely sure what it is. I agree that press pushing the racism charge on anyone describing the virus accurately plays into Chinese propaganda. It has the added cost of advancing the left’s broader Orwellian project to stop debate by labeling those telling hard truths as racist, sexist, etc. I also get that you wish potus expressed himself better. You are right that China will try to stop its people from seeing truth which is critical of china’s government, but I don’t see why this makes you think the answer is to let the Chinese lies slide rather than confront the lies at risk of a Cold War which could turn hot. In light of your description of events, isn’t it even more critical that we publicly decry Chinese lies and misdeeds and stand up to the left and press in their desire to defend China? Some of the truth will make it through to the Chinese people unless we let fear of offending leave the public field to china’s defenders and the woke crowd. Genuinely and respectfully puzzled.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Juan J

      Even if the press had no issue with Trump calling it the China or Wuhan virus, the Chinese people would still take offense. Our issue is not with the Chinese people, we’re their natural allies as we are to all people under authoritarian rule, it’s with their government. Call it Xi’s virus if you want or the chicom virus. Otherwise, you’re playing right into the Chinese government’s hands.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Kevin Johnson

        Respectfully disagree. The best counter to propaganda is accurate language. It is the Wuhan virus based on past practice and truth. We should reject efforts to make neutral, true statements “ racist. Separately, we should blame the Chinese government for its actions hiding the virus and worsening the plague. So far no proof they caused it, though, so it would be false to call it the Chicom or X virus. We know from dissidents that they highly value true statements from the West which their government opposes. Haven’t seen this phenomenon yet over virus, but I wager many will see the Wuhan label as logical, descriptive, and acceptable.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Juan J

          It was easier in calling out the Soviets and having the Russians and Ukrainians admire our transparent honesty.

          The Sandinistas were bad, Nicaraguans admired us.

          It’d be nice if we had simple words that easily roll off the tongue to distinguish the Chinese government and the Chinese people.

          Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Aylene Wright

      I don't think JG thinks we should let Chinese lies slide, but he is pessimistic about how effective any counter-programming will be. Especially as many media figures who have been stuck in an "enemy of my enemy" attitude when it comes to Trump. If Trump is attacking China, he must be the wrong, and therefore the Chinese government must be in the right.

      On the other hand, it has been fairly easy to call out Putin as Trump has been cozy with him, and Russians are white, so we can bash then without falling afoul of the intersectionalists.

      I think it is important though to separate the "Chinese government" and the "Chinese people", and IMO I don't think Trump has really been doing that. And now both he and the media have fallen into their old habits of "Trump says something they stokes media outrage, the media is outraged, so Trump keeps doing what gets him attention". I'm sure he'd much rather fight over what to call the virus, than whether he messed up how to deal with the actual pandemic caused by the virus.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        John Q. Public

        I basically see it this way:

        1.) The pearl-clutching from the media and many Democrats in Congress about how we refer to the virus originating in China is vastly overblown and stupid. It also indirectly helps run interference for the Chinese effort to obscure the virus's origin.

        2.) Trump is not doing this to counter Chinese propaganda or "be accurate", but to stick his thumb in the eye of the media and his critics (AFAIK, this whole thing started with a tweet from Kevin MCarthy and Trump only jumped on board when it became obvious that it bothered the usual suspects).

        3.) It is possible for those mentioned in point 1 to be useful idiots for the Chinese regime without *intentionally siding with* the Chinese regime, as was posited by a particularly unhinged question from OAN in yesterday's press conference and has been suggested by many in Trump's orbit.

        4.) All of this is so far down the list of things that matter right now as to barely merit mentioning, and those fueling the debate on both sides should be ashamed of themselves.

        Collapse
      2. Avatar photo
        Kevin Johnson

        Very good points. Thanks. I still conclude that conservatives should resist media siding with Chinese and/or woke propaganda. The virus started in China, so using that name is appropriate. People are welcome to disagree with that, but if they charge us with racism or xenophobia over it, we need to push back. Also, China was and is a bad actor on the virus and we should point that out. Media wanting to own Trump, and vice versa, doesn’t change our national interests in taking down false narratives. Didn’t see the interview you mention so I won’t comment. However, criticism of wet markets and bad hygiene are entirely appropriate and need not be offensive.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Octávio Lima

          Conservatives did not allow the media siding with Cuba for a long time. Conservatives did not allow the media to whitewash communist regimes in Africa and Asia. Conservatives did not allow the media to side with socialist ideas. But conservatives always did it with a language that was not designed to provoke. That is a model to be followed.

          Collapse
          1. Avatar photo
            Kevin Johnson

            Good sentiments, Octavio. My problem is that the left and the media want to decide what is provocative. I just don’t think accurately calling this the Wuhan virus is provocative. Anyone is welcome to disagree with me, but if they call me racist, rather than just mistaken, I will resist. Of course, Trump is always provocative and unfit to be president, but that is no reason to surrender to the language police. “Racist” is losing its meaning with perverse over use. There are many, many other cases as well. If we let the woke set control language we are disarming when there are important debates to be had.

            Collapse
      3. Avatar photo
        Aylene Wright

        PS: Also, the problem is not just Trump saying "China virus" but his allies saying even worse things. Cornyn recently had a horrid interview where he blamed the disease not just on the CCP, but on Chinese people who eat wild animals and vermin.

        Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    Earl King

    Economics can be a reason countries go to war...think Japan after we embargo them. But it can be greed of a different sort. Land. power, control etc. China has not gone overseas to fight a war that I am aware of, Mongolia, North Vietnam perhaps and they were on their borders. I can see a cold war.....H1N1, SARS all came from China because they people like eating non farm animals. We should re-think allowing them to our shores? The current virus is reported to come from a bat or snake.
    Our affair with China outsourcing much of our production capacity all comes from Nixon and Kissinger. They looked to China to be a fulcrum to be used against Russian hegemony. Bring China in to the modern world with Trade and they'll become a friendly world citizen. They certainly are an economic enemy looking to own every resource and every technology. To doubt they have sent 1000's of students here using Red Army money to learn or steal our knowledge is ignorant. This is how totalitarian regimes think. We have given much to China...in return we get cheap ass Badminton Sets we can buy at Wal Mart and Apple gets to charge us only $700 for a new phone rather than $1000.....Somehow I'm less sure I feel good. Of course our leverage is to simply say...Hey all those US Bonds you bought? All the debt? We can't pay you at the moment.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Logical

      All of a sudden, there is a lot of China bashing going on, and intensifying by day. Sure, the virus is testing us, but let's not lose our minds.
      - biology is complex, still escapes our ability to control. What if the next virus comes from Canada? No one intentionally did this.
      - the US supply chains are a result of hundreds of thousands of decisions made by American business managers over decades, optimizing the capital returns. Let's not make ourselves the victims; we did it to promote our own interests.
      - AEI wants to start a top down economic planning, a la the good old USSR, to rid the Chinese menace. (Read elsewhere on this site)
      - Trump wants to punish Europe because they want to buy Chinese equipment.
      - There is war terminology seeping in, as though a neo-neocon movement is shaping up (but for commercial front).

      My take is, (once dominant) China slept for two hundred years and woke up about forty years ago...and fast caught up. Now they are a force do deal with, but as a potential equal...not as a villain. The language is becoming arrogant and contemptuous against China.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Juan J

        “AEI wants to start a top down economic planning, a la the good old USSR,“

        I knew their was still intelligent life on comment boards. Brilliant point.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Octávio Lima

          If that is not disappointing, I am not sure I know what is. AEI is not supposed to promote industrial policy this way. But in fairness, at least for now, they are not advocating "America First" industrial policy, where things must be made in the US. The diversification of production chains for which they advocate is something that will probably happen organically, as we had been seeing even before President Trump came down from the escalators. Partly it will be because China itself is trying to diversify their economies and move more into services, rather than manufacturing, something they have been trying to do since the beginning of the 2010s, partly because of what Jonah says in the article, China is no longer so cheap. And partly it will be because after COVID-19, corporations will try to understand the weaknesses of their supply chains and how to strengthen them will certainly require a dose of diversification, which already happens.

          Collapse
      2. Avatar photo
        John Q. Public

        I do tend to be contemptuous of totalitarian regimes that are currently engaged in committing genocide, yes.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Octávio Lima

          As you should. But that is not the reason there is China bashing these days. The President, just to name the most prominent one, rarely mentions that China is a totalitarian regime. He rarely mentions the inherent freedom of human beings. From all his proclamations, I am still unsure he believes natural rights. And this is a President who talks a lot. He does, however, talk a lot about the trade deficit. If that is our only concern about China, we may be doing this wrong.

          Collapse
          1. Avatar photo
            Logical

            OL, agree. If the context is human rights in general and China wrt Uygurs, HK, & authoritarianism, I would be the most vociferous critic.

            However, we lost our moral authority on that subject when our dear leader's 1st state visit was to one of the most authoritarian countries in the world, hack saw an American resident, and whose citizens butchered 3000 innocent Americans in one shot.

            Collapse
      3. Avatar photo
        Paul Reichardt

        ^this.

        Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    Logical

    Ironies abound in this column. JG occasionally disappoints when he starts blaming others.

    For the last five decades, we have given a free reign to the investment banks and private equity firms to realign the supply chains for maximum profitability. All of a sudden, it is convenient to blame China, "the evil people." Come on. They are rational too. And some of the attributes assigned to Xi and Putin are readily transferable to the situation in US today.

    " His economy in tatters and the political system corrupt, Trump is holding on to power in part by convincing the American people that they are besieged from abroad. “The Other” is trying to destroy Homeland, and only a strong man like him can protect the homeland." How does that sound?

    "And that message is that the blame for their problems doesn’t belong with their own corrupt government, but with the MSM." Fake news anyone?

    "The mainstream media’s ridiculous obsession with proving President Trump is racist because he calls it the “Chinese coronavirus” is perfectly in sync with the Chinese propaganda effort." JG didn't read yesterday's DF column yet.


    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      John Q. Public

      1.) That Trump shares the authoritarian instincts of Putin and Xi does not mean that the situations are even remotely comparable to the situation in the USA. Trump is not murdering journalists, or threatening doctors with prison for telling the truth, or carrying out a genocide. There are several orders of magnitude between the US and those countries, and indeed between Russia and China themselves.

      2.) I don't see any contradiction between Jonah and David's positions. David was saying that it is inaccurate and irresponsible to say that American media outlets are knowingly "pumping Chinese propaganda". Jonah is saying that parts of the media are indirectly helping China's propaganda efforts by making this story about an allegation of racism rather than China's proven, intentional suppression of truth about the virus at the end of last year.

      Both can be true.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Aylene Wright

        I think Jonah and David do disagree about how important the actual (common) name of the virus is to the overall strategy of countering CCP propaganda.

        And that's actually ok with me. It shows two people can respectfully disagree with each other. I also know that Sarah disagreed with the guys recently on whether sexism played a role in the demise of Warren's presidential ambitions.

        One aspect of the Trump era that I despise is how it's exacerbated the tendency for us to split into ideological tribes, and to kick out anyone who doesn't agree and march in lockstep with the tribe. So I am happy that we can have civil disagreements here.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          John Q. Public

          Completely agree that it is fine for them to disagree, I just mean that I don't necessarily see their points as contradictory (I happen to agree with them both). Also, the sexism discussion last week was one of my favorite exchanges on the podcast so far. As someone who listens to a lot of male-dominated podcasts, I appreciate getting Sarah's perspective and her willingness to push back.

          Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Earl King

      Missing from you reply (other than the tin foil hat you must wear) is the News the Mueller prosecutors dropped all charges against the Russians who meddled in our elections in the most pathetic way. Yes, read Andrew McCarthy's NR article...truly a star chamber of stupidity.

      Collapse
    3. Avatar photo
      Jimcarp707

      Wow. What color is the sky where you live?

      Collapse
      1. Paul Zummo

        For a guy with logical in his name and who the other day was becoming the lack of facts-based arguments, he certainly ignores some very important facts about the Chinese regime to paint them as innocent victims of propaganda campaign.

        Collapse
      2. Avatar photo
        Idontdocute

        Non sequitur ...what is the counter argument?

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Jimcarp707

          Um...everything Jonah said in the article? Just guessing.

          Collapse
      3. Avatar photo
        Steve Eggleston

        Probably red, with a hint of yellow.

        Collapse