Since the pandemic began, thousands of cases of harassment (or worse) of Chinese and Chinese-American people have been reported, despite the fact that they have nothing to do with the coronavirus’ origin and are suffering the same dangers as everybody else. Unfortunately, this prejudice was sanctioned and even promoted by the White House in 2020. This is a stain on our democracy, and, unfortunately, it’s not a new one.
Institutionalized prejudice against Chinese people did not begin with Former President Trump. It goes back nearly 150 years to the Chinese Exclusion Act, signed into law in 1882 and only repealed in 1943, which prohibited Chinese immigration into the U.S. The Page Act, signed into law in 1875, specifically targeted Chinese women.
In the present day, we should first answer the question, “Wouldn’t the entire planet be better off with a productive relationship between two great powers who have a dominant effect on world politics and economy?” My answer is yes. I think we can also agree that whatever prejudice exists, it should not be codified or exploited by systems of government.
Even with a new administration, I have seen nothing but wrong-footed strategies, even from those who should know. One example is from The Economist magazine, which, in the “Leaders” section of its November 21, 2020 issue, ran a piece entitled, “The China Strategy America Needs.” The subtitle is, “As President, Joe Biden should aim to strike a grand bargain with America’s democratic allies.”
For several reasons, I don’t agree with this approach. I have studied, done business in, lived and taught in China for several decades, so I have a lot of empirical background for my disagreement. For one thing, democracy is not the issue. A functional, one-party government is better than a dysfunctional two-party one, in my opinion. Even if we strike this “bargain,” what are the chances that our weaker allies will stand up to pressure, especially those in Asia who may even share a border with China? Additionally, it has been repeatedly shown that China is sensitive, even a bit paranoid, about being “surrounded.” Isn’t this one key to why Mao agreed to the Shanghai Communique with Nixon and Kissinger in 1972? So how exactly does that solve the problem?
Instead, I believe we should give up the democracy condition. China is not and never will be a democracy like the U.S. (especially after the example we have provided for the world recently). It would be better to focus on mutual economic benefit. There is no doubt that both countries have a huge amount to gain from a better business relationship.
It is also important for our leaders to talk to China directly, honestly and with respect for both countries’ requirements. It is the only way to set the final objectives and ground rules between us. We must also understand that politics is culturally-based. We should make understanding their culture (and our own, good and bad) a prerequisite for negotiations, with equal respect for both.
We need to clean our glasses and see both sides clearly. Even with our best efforts, it will take a lot of time and effort to remove this stain from our national reputation. Prejudice against the Chinese and other minorities is ingrained into our culture, and we cannot take our rightful leadership position in the world unless we recognize and eliminate it from influencing our attitudes and thus, our policy.
Michael Serwetz is an adjunct instructor at FIT, NYU and Baruch College. He is the author of the forthcoming book, “Travels with Mikey: Business Life of a Global Foodie.”
