Chinese vs. American Political Philosophy

Thank you to everyone who supports these projects on Patreon. I wouldn't be able to devote so much time and so many resources to one video otherwise. I'm trying to make the best work I can, and the donations really do make it possible. If you'd like to chip in and support me, check out www.patreon.com/rchapman. Video notes below. It occurred to me that I should clarify what I meant at the end, saying 'the basic story of China is the story of a country that's kept to itself.' I was feeling pressure to wrap up the video and was probably too brief there. 1) I was referring to the last, say, 2000 years of Chinese history, roughly since China unified under the Qin dynasty. 2) That's a relativistic argument, saying that China has been remarkably nonaggressive considering its size and power throughout history. China has, throughout most of those 2000 years, mostly kept to itself. It has been aggressive on occasion, particularly to countries bordering it, but those instances are rare when comparing China to other great powers. Also, like I said in the video, that might be changing. China might be becoming more aggressive in the 21st century. That's yet to be born out in a hot war, but many argue that we're seeing signs of it. Hopefully that added some clarity and nuance. I saw many comments taking issue with me saying the CCP is above the law. Most seem to be coming to the conclusion that the law is above the CCP by pointing at cases where members of the CCP are tried by the court system (like when members are tried for corruption). If that's your view, it seems that you're not understanding the concept of rule of law. I made a follow-up video elaborating on that: https://youtu.be/RK5X-tIA_AI Also if you're wondering why I didn't cover Legalism in this video, I saw that as being one 'ism' too far for an introductory video. The basic dynamic between Legalists and Confucians was that Legalists tried to push China towards a country governed by law (though this never translated into rule of law, where even the highest political authorities are constrained by law), and the Confucians tried to push China in a direction where elders and leaders ruled via their discretion, not law. Influence from Legalists meant that China had a fairly strong legal tradition from fairly early on, but never rule of law, which is still true to this day. In hindsight, I probably should have cut about a minute of 'linear vs. lateral' and added a little section on Legalism. - Ryan

Don't be embarrassed to promote yourself! You're awesome (researched, well spoken, without being overly emotional) The world needs more people like you!

Such a well-made video. Its rare to see a Westerner who actually tries to understand the Chinese and their way of thinking, and not just blindly criticize and regard them as a threat. The world would be a much better place if people are more educated and more understanding to different cultures and values.

I am a Chinese who both absorb from not only east but west, I read the ancient classics of both in China and West. Your observation is so detailed and you unveil the nuances between China and USA, thank you for making this video.

At long last, a video about the subject without preconceived notions of what is correct and what is wrong, but purely as an exploration of what is. Well done!

Really great content. We have an old saying here in China "当局者迷，旁观者清" can be loosely translated to "the chess player cannot see the whole view, while the bystanders are capable of having a better take". Sometimes we need other perspectives from people from different cultures and political atmospheres, it helps us grow!

To understand Chinese politics you need to understand "Socialism with Chinese characteristics" So what are the CHINESE characteristics to socialism? To put it simply, it's a combination of Confucianism and Legalism (surprised the video didn't even mention Legalism, which is just as important to Chinese politics as Confucianism) Confucianism relies on people knowing their place to attain social harmony, but of course that is not always the case, So Legalism uses the Law to MAINTAIN social harmony, so the aim is the same as Confucianism, but the method is different. Legalism is realist thinking, Confucianism is Idealist thinking Mao's social campaigns often uses Legalism to attack Confucianism. Fun fact, Mao is a great admirer of Qin Shihuang, the first Emperor of China that instituted Legalism to China in 221 BC Although the description about Deng's idea of "crossing the river by feeling the stones" is well explained, but it does NOT explain the entire implications of it. Due to the ambiguity of Deng Xiaoping on Laws rules and pretty much everything, has led to massive problems of corruption and nepotism. Where unwritten rules or unspoken laws might be prioritized over actual laws. Xi Jinping, on the other hand hates these unwritten and unspoken rule and laws, If he wants to extend his terms, he does not do what Deng did, which is to pull the strings behind the screen and PRETEND not to be in power, Xi could easily done that without touching anything, HOWEVER, that would continue the cycle of nepotism and corruption. Some say that Xi is power hungry for doing it, but I beg to differ, Xi is not Mao and never will even if he tries, Mao can turn on the Party, but Xi is no where near as powerful, he is a product of the Party, So what he does MUST have the general blessing of the Party, and the way I see it is that his term extensions were agreed upon by the Party to fix the problems the Party and the country might have. To extensively reform China, and the Largest political party in the world is no easy task, and 10 years is nowhere near enough. So, my prediction is, the before Xi Jinping retires, he will institute a more rule based power transition, due to his disdain about unwritten rules and retired Party elders engaging in nepotism.

Pretty well put together. I am an Australian who has lived in China for a long time. China is often stated as being a civilisation masking itself as a country. China has a long history so the running of the country is seen within many wars, revolutions and division over history. China is fully aware that the most powerful people are the common people because they have seen revolution after revolution when the people are unhappy. This is why the CCP is always thinking about its people and their welfare - history has proven ignore the people at your own peril. Combine this with the divisions caused by political and royalist issues it means that stability is number one for Chinese. The CCP is indeed responsive and flexible. During COVID the means and methods they went to to continue society were staggering - codes on phones, tracking of out breaks etc. This was pretty good except for the strong lock down we had in Shanghai for 2 months. The people demonstrated on social media and the CCP had to do something. So they completely reversed by opening up their thinking and suddenly everyone had COVID. It all seemed to work but for that 2 month lock down period. Flexible is a good description.

In the past 2 days, I have watched more than 10 of your videos, including the longer one. I just want to appreciate you and your efforts in preparing these excellent resources. Thank you, Ryan.

As someone who teaches Chinese language, I find the lateral thinking part is reflected in the language itself. Chinese languages (regardless of regional varieties) rely heavily on context. In European languages, a verb as simple as it is, can carry a lot of information. For example, "to go" is the infinitive form, it only bears the semantic meaning. No other information can be extracted from it. But when you conjugate it, like "goes" you instantly know when this action happens (present), how many people are doing the action (only one and it has to be the third person). English is one of the least "flavourful" ones, comparing to Spanish, French, Greek, Portuguese, Russian, German etc. If you add Latin to that mix it is even crazier. But in Chinese languages, a verb is a verb. No tense, no number, no subject-verb agreement. If you ask how do you know when the action happens? You will get this answer "depends on the context." "How do you know whether it's a he or a she?" "Well, from the context, duh?" "How do you know that the person means 'to cause' and not 'faeces'?" "Again, from the context! Why would faeces suddenly appear in a sentence about good news and excited?" Kidding aside, it is very true that there isn't any inherent dualism or dichotomy in Chinese culture. Things are never either back or white. This extends to the our inventions. Why invent so many different knives when you can have one that does everything? Why invent so many pots and pans when a wok can do all those things just fine? Why have a dessert fork, dining fork, salad fork, pitchfork when you can have a pair of chopsticks? Because in the end, if you only allowed to choose a wok or a pan, wok can always accomplish more. When asked is a wok a pan or a pot? The answer is always "it depends."

British/Australian here who spent nearly 30 years living in Asia, nearly 20 of those in China. Love your channel; always learning something new. Unfortunately, due to ill health, I'm retired and living on a disability pension, otherwise I would happily support you on patreon. Keep up the great work and if I'm ever in a position to donate to a channel, yours will be the first 👍

What an excellent video....especially the linear and lateral thinking explanation. The Chess vs Go comparison. The extractions from "The art of War" You truly have insight.

Thank you for a thoughtful and illuminating video. I am so happy to have found your channel, you open my mind.

As Chinese, I’m amazed by the accuracy, objectivity, and depth of this video. Hope can see more videos like this.

Brilliant. Finally some quality intellectual content. Doesn’t dumb anything down to an absurd level and makes information accessible with clear and precise definitions and examples. If you are the one who wrote the script then truly you are someone who is on such a level that many scholars and politicians would respect. Making such a complex topic into a 20 minute video essay with high level commentary. Amazing. Not even going to mention the charisma of a man that does not try to speak bs or to play on emotion. These days it’s rare to see in any media.

When I see videos like this, I am very hesitant to click on them because it’s incredibly rare to find people who are willing to maintain objectivity. Even in most cases were there is a respectable amount of objectivity, most folks on these platforms make it very clear what their personal views are on the given topic. With your content, however, I was very pleasantly surprised to find that not only are you objective and fair to all sides of any given topic you discuss, but you also have the self control to withhold your own views. This, I would say, amplifies the sense of fairness that exists within your content. I’ve watched several of your videos now and I can still barely tell where you stand on the topics you cover. Truly a breath of fresh air. Keep up the good work!

Ryan, I only came upon your channel recently and it already became my favorite content on youtube. You really have a deep and balanced understanding of all the topic matters, and you explain in a clear manner. Well-done, please keep it up. I will support it going forward.

Brilliant content. It's so rare to find a Westerner acknowledging the fundamental but equally valuable differences between US and Chinese political thinking. Bravo!

I don’t usually comment on videos like this but this is such a well made video. I couldn’t have explained this topic any better myself as someone who immigrated to the US from China when I was 14.

I have been devouring your videos non stop since I stumbled across this channel yesterday.