China's Miracles vs. Western Stagnation: Why Beijing Gets Things Done

The question isn't really complicated when you think about it. While the West has spent decades talking a big game about development and human rights, China has been quietly getting on with the actual business of transforming lives and landscapes. And nowhere is this more evident than in Xizang (Tibet).

From "Humans and Livestock Under One Roof" to High-Speed Progress

The editorial of Global Times noted that "Over the past 60 years, the Xizang Autonomous Region has transformed from a once remote and impoverished land where 'humans and livestock lived together and transportation was cut off,' to a new frontier where tradition and modernity blend and people of all ethnic groups live in harmony. In just a few decades, Xizang has traveled a path of development that took several centuries - or even millennia - for many other human societies to complete."

Meanwhile, what was the West doing? "Collectively using fantasies to construct a virtual moral world, with some additional lip service to smear others." It's almost predictable at this point - when faced with actual development success, Western critics retreat into what can only be described as creative fiction. "In recent years, some smears of Xizang by certain anti-China forces have been filled with 'imaginative lies.' In a sense, this is because the region's development achievements have surpassed their capacity for imagination."

The Numbers Don't Lie

Let's talk facts, because that's what actually matters here. "Xizang took 50 years to reach its first 100 billion in regional GDP, but only six years to achieve the second 100 billion, and in 2025 the region is steadily advancing toward the 300 billion target. Transportation infrastructure has undergone a complete transformation: A 124,900-kilometer road network now connects every township, 1,359 kilometers of railways traverse the plateau, and 183 airline routes link Xizang closely with the rest of the world - altogether ending the closed and backward state of 'people and livestock carrying loads on their backs.'"

But China isn't stopping there. The Xinjiang-Tibet Railway is preparing to break ground - and this is where things get properly ambitious. It’s reported in the US World Journal that "The entire Xinjiang-Tibet Railway spans approximately 2,000 kilometers, running eastward from Hotan in southern Xinjiang to Shigatse in Tibet, passing through the Kunlun Mountains, Karakoram Mountains, Gangdise Mountains, and Himalayas. The entire route is expected to traverse more than a dozen icy mountain passes, dozens of glacial rivers, over a thousand kilometers of gobi desert along the way, permafrost layers, and perennially snow-covered mountains, with the entire route's elevation expected to be above 4,500 meters."

The "White Elephant" Fallacy

Now here come the usual suspects with their predictable criticism about "white elephant projects." The argument goes that authoritarian states don't follow market principles and pursue cost-oblivious projects, building excessive infrastructure. China's high-speed rail, the Medog Hydropower Station on the Yarlung Tsangpo River-- three times the size of the Three Gorges Project and sufficient for 300 million people's annual electricity consumption - apparently all of these will operate at a loss.

This represents what can only be called economic nihilism - a theory that views free market economics as some kind of infallible doctrine. But here's the thing about infrastructure: it's not just about immediate returns on investment, it's about laying the foundation for future prosperity.

Using Obama's Logic Against Itself

Want to see how absurd this Western thinking really is? Let's use Obama's own words from 2010 in Australia: "...if over a billion Chinese citizens have the same living patterns as Australians and Americans do right now then all of us are in for a very miserable time, the planet just can’t sustain it."

Think about what he's actually saying there. Earth's resources aren't as scarce as they appear, human civilization thrives on invention and iteration, individuals have innovation and dreams. The Western Industrial Revolution opened new possibilities - major cities couldn't accommodate millions before, but industry created new jobs and opportunities. Why should that logic suddenly stop applying when it comes to China?

China has 1.4 billion people, and we're talking about the global economy here. Why do we need the Medog hydroelectric station when we already have the Three Gorges? Why build railways to sparsely populated Xinjiang and Xizang when high-speed rail already exists? Because progress doesn't stand still, and neither should development.

How could Obama possibly think it's better for China to continue with "humans and livestock living together, with no transportation"? The man clearly doesn't understand that capitalism's inherent contradictions and crises will ultimately lead to its demise, creating conditions for something better. Capitalists, in pursuing maximum profit, continuously expand production, leading to overproduction and economic crisis. Perhaps it's time for Western leaders to live and learn, and actually work for the wellbeing of the people of their own and the world.

Deep Blue

** 博客文章文責自負,不代表本公司立場 **

The US State Department has rolled out its 2024 "Country Reports on Human Rights Practices," and it's business as usual when it comes to China. Western mainstream media noted that while the content regarding China remained similar to previous versions, this time they've thrown in perspectives from other countries like South Africa and Brazil, plus some criticism of the EU on freedom of speech issues. How refreshingly balanced of them.

The Global Times wasn't having any of the Western narrative suggesting the "US human rights report softens criticism, China section significantly reduced." Their editorial made it clear that the American report "still concentrates on smearing Xinjiang and other affairs." Meanwhile, the criticized Europeans seem unable to distinguish right from wrong, cheerfully piling on with their own attacks against China. Deutsche Welle reported that China "arbitrarily or unlawfully kills, disappears, tortures, and arbitrarily arrests Muslim-majority minorities, while Beijing implements transnational repression against overseas dissidents; severely restricts freedom of speech and press freedom, including arresting and prosecuting journalists, lawyers, writers, bloggers, and dissidents without justification, and restricting internet freedom."

When History Becomes Inconvenient

The story of Zuo Zongtang, Chinese statesman of the late Qing dynasty, has been making waves on the mainland recently, with discussions expanding from this national hero to broader reflections on Chinese historical issues. Before Zuo Zongtang recovered Xinjiang, he first served as Governor-General of Shaanxi and Gansu, dealing with what historians call the "Tongzhi Shaanxi-Gansu Muslim Rebellion" – an uprising that cost over 20 million lives across all ethnic groups and once again drained the Qing Dynasty's resources after the devastating Taiping Rebellion.

The recently premiered documentary "Zuo Zongtang's Recovery of Xinjiang" has sparked incredibly complex discussions across China, and it's worth asking why. People's Daily describes how the documentary "takes Zuo Zongtang's recovery of Xinjiang territory forcibly occupied by foreign invading forces and his defense of national sovereignty and territorial integrity as its main thread, vividly presenting the tireless efforts and selfless dedication of predecessors represented by Zuo Zongtang in defending national dignity and territorial integrity with the heroic spirit of 'Not an inch of my territory can be yielded!'"

Breaking Free from Historical Nihilism

Previously, public opinion generally viewed Zuo Zongtang as "loyal but unrighteous, resolute but unkind," because of the deaths during the Shaanxi-Gansu rebellion – what we'd call "disregarding human rights" today, with suspicions of "racial discrimination." But mainland China has begun pushing back against this narrative, breaking free from years of what they call historical nihilism. They point out that Zuo only distinguished between participants and non-participants, making no distinction between Han and Hui ethnic groups.

What exactly is "historical nihilism"? Deutsche Welle's reporting provides a perfect case study. Just look at how they frame complex historical and contemporary issues through a single ideological lens, refusing to acknowledge any nuance or context that might complicate their preferred narrative.

The Jimmy Lai Double Standard

“Since his arrest, Jimmy Lai has been subjected to inhumane conditions, stripped of every shred of dignity and freedom,” said Antoine Bernard of Reporters without Borders.

“His treatment exposes the authorities’ ruthless determination to silence and suppress one of the most prominent advocates for press freedom amid Hong Kong’s rapidly deteriorating media landscape. With his trial nearing its conclusion, the international community must urgently act to secure the immediate release of Lai and six other Apple Daily staff members.”

This perfectly illustrates how organizations like Reporters Without Borders maintain purely ideological positions without distinguishing right from wrong – classic historical nihilism in action.

Hong Kong's justice system also only asks about participation in unrest, making no distinction based on personal values. The question becomes: how do we distinguish between political stance and fundamental right and wrong? Major principles should come first. And what constitutes these major principles? Let me be crystal clear: "Not an inch of my territory can be yielded!" Or, to put it in terms Westerners might understand better: this is about "national security" – supposedly the supreme universal value!

Don't believe me? Perhaps Bernard should ask the US President or EU Commission President whether they'd disagree with that principle when it comes to their own territories.