BOOK REVIEW Short-changing China's century The Empire of Lies by Guy Sorman
Reviewed by Benjamin Shobert
It is no small thing to take away another man's freedom. This realization is
unmistakably etched throughout Guy Sorman's newest book on China, The Empire of
Lies: the Truth about China in the Twenty-First Century, in a way that
is remarkably consistent, if not always balanced or nuanced.
And yet this is exactly the frustration Sorman has with those he sees as
apologists for China's ruling class: when measured against individual liberty,
economic progress is but a slight counterweight, nor should balance in the face
of authoritarians necessarily be a goal.
Certainly, this is nothing new - in many ways it is the inevitable
devil's bargain imposed by advocates of realpolitik. Since former United States
president Richard Nixon, China's challenge for those in the West has always
been convincing ourselves that doing business with the country would ultimately
cause it to become more like us. This perspective was not always a natural,
obvious or, as Sorman would have us believe, wise response when dealing with
the likes of China.
Recently, the work of James Mann, author of The China Fantasy: How Our Leaders
Explain Away Chinese Repression, elevated many of the same concerns,
suggesting to Americans that the air of inevitably about how and why China
would change to look more like us was worth reconsidering. Mann's very pointed
question was how Americans would feel if, 10 years down the road, China remains
an authoritarian regime with no republican impulses and there is little in the
way of meaningful democratization. In other words, a large and very rich
ideological opposite to the American way.
That much of China's possible gains could come not only at the US' perceived
economic loss, but also along with certain political repressions which would
seem to violate American principles, has historical weight. This sort of
generational mistake is worth considering and contemplating.
Sorman's point is much more direct, and he sees no reason to engage in
conceptual arguments about China as a disembodied entity, its potential or
promise, when very real oppression and poverty exist today. Without a doubt,
this is both the foundational truth and error of his critique: where is, as his
book's title suggests, the "truth" about China?
Sorman would have the reader believe that the truth about China is to be found
most accurately in political dissidents, whose rights have unquestionably been
trampled upon, and whose legitimate grievances on matters of our deepest
humanity seem always to be held against some ambiguous fear that elevating a
conversation concerning their indignities will put at risk all that connects
China to the developing world. He would equally assert that China's political
leadership has not progressed from Mao Zedong's era of double-talk,
authoritarian egos, and bruising nationalism.
If Sorman were to make a more nuanced point - as many certainly have - that
China's political leadership is still somewhat immature and can be guilty of
being unresponsive to these problems, while at the same time suggesting a means
by which the reader could determine where China stands in relation to his
political ideal - it would be easier to take these criticisms more seriously.
Empire of Lies reads in a way which leaves one with the impression that
everything which can be said of the many changes China has made in the last 30
years come up short to anything resembling meaningful change: this seems to be
an error which smacks not only of unrealistic expectations, but a sort of
lubricant to ideas which themselves could set in motion events taking us
backwards.
As many criticisms of China go, this one is true in so far as it goes, but
manages to come up short in advocating a clearer picture of what could be
expected from this enormous country, recovering from so much depravity and
ruin, in its attempts to rebuild.
At its worst, Sorman's critique seems to overlook the developmental reality
that every country's self-reflective capacity owes a debt to time and trauma.
China has much of the latter, and Sorman would give it too little of the
former. This seems never more blatant than when he writes, "What about the
Cultural Revolution? Liu Xia says that nothing distinguishes it from Auschwitz.
The Red Guards arrested and tortured anyone whose hands were clean, unsoiled by
manual labor, or who had a university degree. Some 30 million people were
slaughtered. The real difference is this: whereas Europe is trying to
understand the reasons that led to Auschwitz in the hope of it preventing it
from ever happening again, such thinking is forbidden in China because the
Party that ordered the Cultural Revolution is still in power. The current
leaders were once Red Guards." (pg 45)
Does this really capture the current generation of Chinese leadership? Is this
not in its own way a caricature that serves Sorman's underlying purpose? In
this, does it shed more heat than light on the question of what constitutes the
objectives of China's current leaders? Are we to simply discard what they have
done that is positive, good, and constructive, because of the very real blood
on the hands of others which precede them?
Yes, the changes they advocate may come up short of our ideal, but it may also
be that they are no more ready or able to deal with mistakes of their country's
past than our own leaders have been in admitting our own. Lost in Empire of Lies
is this nuance, that we should be mature enough, and sufficiently aware of our
own sins, to know how to be patient in the face of a country whose changes do
not yet measure up to our expectations.
When Sorman penetrates the interior of China, he touches on points that are too
often overlooked by other commentators: the poverty, the uneven level of
political rights, and areas of backwards governance. These all turn attention
towards segments of the country that are poorly understood by outsiders. In
this sense, Sorman is very right to point out that whatever seeds of progress
have been sown along China's prosperous eastern coast, large numbers of Chinese
still suffer, and their unmet needs form the epicenter of an unhappy social
class who will not forever overlook Beijing and its ills.
Yet, the very real progress and pulse that is felt within the fabric of China's
developing regions can not be overlooked, and it should not be marginalized.
Nor should the many leaders who constitute the next generation of China's
leadership, who are not guilty of the same blind spots as those they inherit
power from.
Lost in Empire of Lies is the idea that in these respects, perhaps other
equally important "truths" about China are to be found. Sorman's critique is
well-grounded in the idea that too much commentary about China does not
penetrate the country's interior and its often-correlated political and
economic problems, but in focusing the reader's attention on this, he seems to
make the exact same mistake again, but in arguing that in China's errors are
all the determinants of its future.
The needed changes which Sorman illuminates can be seen and justified in many
ways: unfortunate but inevitable consequences of China's history, the
demographic burden it must live with and never get too far beyond, or a
necessary awkward transition point in its development. Sorman's point is that
none of these are really adequate answers if you lack freedom.
Empire of Lies suffers from a number of problems, not least of which is
the difficulty it has in offering a counter-point to the conventional thinking
on China which Sorman has such a problem with. Not able to suggest exactly
where and when people could gauge that China is changing for the better, Sorman
seems only to know that thus far is not far enough.
And while this is fine, even admirable when measured against the ideal of human
freedom, China's re-engagement with the world is not likely to follow a
pre-determined path where its ultimate good can be determined any more than
such a question could be affirmed for any other still developing society across
time. Historical analogies - comparisons between the British Commonwealth's
rise or the burgeoning American empire post-World War II - all may prove
feckless against the good or ill that China becomes capable of.
In this, Sorman has every right to ask questions about the trajectory of
China's development, and the risks which coincide with placating its baser
impulses. But asking these questions without an appreciation of how far China
has come, or what the problems are that it must deal with is unfair, and the
analysis within Empire of Lies suffers as a result.
Take as one example of this unfairness Sorman's thoughts on how China's people
can effect change: "As things stand, rebellion is the only recourse left for
people to express their discontent. What is even more worrisome is the question
of succession ... Until now, fortune has favored China. If its lucky streak
continues, so will the status quo ... moreover, the Chinese abhor disorder,
their history having nurtured in them a deep-seated fear of civil strife, and
the Party leadership knows how to play on this fear." (pg xiii)
Heralding rebellion as the only option for meaningful political change is a
canard, an impossibly high standard to meet, and perhaps one proposed only
because it would be so obvious to outsiders that wrestling to see more subtle
changes within the country's leadership would be unnecessary. It also comes
across as cavalier, without an adequate appreciation of the high cost Chinese
have already paid for abrupt social revolutions.
To the extent a book like Empire of Lies dissuades some from assumptions
and fetishism about the country's future which have been common for many China
watchers, it is valuable. Sorman does make his point, although one wonders at
what cost. He rightly elevates our focus to the many legitimate and problematic
grievances which many inside China have: their lack of political freedoms, the
assumption that individual liberty can be traded for economic progress, blind
eyes towards populations with HIV/AIDS, the lack of property rights, and
dissident voices who face prison for speaking out.
These all constitute real problems which too many China watchers overlook or
are unsure of how to address. In this sense only, we may be thankful for
Sorman's criticisms, but we can be equally dissatisfied with his conclusions
and approach towards finding another way forward, if in no small part because
we recognize in his desire for ideological purity the same passion and
brittleness which has historically led China towards so many of its failed
policies.
Empire of Lies: The Truth About China in the Twenty-First Century by Guy
Sorman, Encounter Books (April 25, 2008). ISBN-10: 1594032165, US$25.95, 325
pages.
Benjamin A Shobert is the managing director of Teleos Inc
(www.teleos-inc.com), a consulting firm dedicated to helping Asian businesses
bring innovative technologies into the North American market.
(Copyright 2009 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us about
sales, syndication and
republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
Recently, the work of James Mann, author of The China Fantasy: How Our Leaders
Explain Away Chinese Repression, elevated many of the same concerns,
suggesting to Americans that the air of inevitably about how and why China
would change to look more like us was worth reconsidering. Mann's very pointed
question was how Americans would feel if, 10 years down the road, China remains
an authoritarian regime with no republican impulses and there is little in the
way of meaningful democratization. In other words, a large and very rich
ideological opposite to the American way.
