Da Wei pulled his observations of the end state debate from a project organized by CSIS in which various U.S. authors (including myself) submitted essays that were published together… so this hardly represents the entirety of the debate, nor is it an attempt to “talk at” anyone.
Weirdly, Da Wei doesn’t seem to cite this CSIS project at all… it would be really valuable if Chinese scholars (and regular Chinese citizens) could read that project in its entirety and make their own conclusions about the debate happening in the United States. But I think we all know that won’t happen.
This newsletter only highlights the key points of Professor Da's article. In his paper, he of course references the CSIS project and these articles. As far as I know, most Chinese scholars who study the U.S. have also read these articles. The real issue is quite the opposite—how many American scholars or ordinary people actually read articles written by Chinese scholars?
We both know your average Chinese citizen can’t access this stuff… only those approved by the Party. We will never have a good faith debate until the Party allows its citizens access to information and news unfiltered.
Ideally everyone should have equal access to public debate everywhere. In reality, Western media tends to publish and promote comments from Western commentators. Non-Western commentators tend to be side lined. Even Western commentators (like Jeffrey Sachs) get side lined if they express views that contradict mainstream opinion. So “good faith discussion” is rare indeed.
But let’s not give up trying to expand the circle and make public debate less exclusive.
I was reading some of the essays in that CSIS October report with that title. I always welcome people who admit things may not be different or even worse if China was a democracy. However, the chat about China nuking Tokyo or Seoul lost me. Maybe if China wanted to take Taiwan, but I don't think Japan and Korea would go that far and risk nuclear war.
The US scholars seem to be only talking to themselves? They should be talking with (and not at) Chinese scholars. Just my view.
Da Wei pulled his observations of the end state debate from a project organized by CSIS in which various U.S. authors (including myself) submitted essays that were published together… so this hardly represents the entirety of the debate, nor is it an attempt to “talk at” anyone.
Weirdly, Da Wei doesn’t seem to cite this CSIS project at all… it would be really valuable if Chinese scholars (and regular Chinese citizens) could read that project in its entirety and make their own conclusions about the debate happening in the United States. But I think we all know that won’t happen.
This newsletter only highlights the key points of Professor Da's article. In his paper, he of course references the CSIS project and these articles. As far as I know, most Chinese scholars who study the U.S. have also read these articles. The real issue is quite the opposite—how many American scholars or ordinary people actually read articles written by Chinese scholars?
We both know your average Chinese citizen can’t access this stuff… only those approved by the Party. We will never have a good faith debate until the Party allows its citizens access to information and news unfiltered.
Ideally everyone should have equal access to public debate everywhere. In reality, Western media tends to publish and promote comments from Western commentators. Non-Western commentators tend to be side lined. Even Western commentators (like Jeffrey Sachs) get side lined if they express views that contradict mainstream opinion. So “good faith discussion” is rare indeed.
But let’s not give up trying to expand the circle and make public debate less exclusive.
"Although Heer’s perspective aligns more closely with China's self-perception of its intentions..."
which China is he referring to? In truth, only one man knows. everyone else is second- and third-guessing
I was reading some of the essays in that CSIS October report with that title. I always welcome people who admit things may not be different or even worse if China was a democracy. However, the chat about China nuking Tokyo or Seoul lost me. Maybe if China wanted to take Taiwan, but I don't think Japan and Korea would go that far and risk nuclear war.
Da Wei presents the so-called “regime-based” end state in bad faith.