If we examine political or journalistic accounts from the West, we find a virtually homogeneous voice claiming that the aggressive “Communist” China represents the most serious threat to the “rules-based international order.” Our leaders claim that the rise of China is harming the working class, taking away our jobs, stealing our technology, and manipulating markets to take all the money, leaving us with nothing.

How true are these arguments ? What are the real underlying reasons that feed the “China threat” narrative ? I will advance my argument now : 1) The crux of this narrative is not the threat to values but the relative loss of privileges of some groups (mainly white men, but not only) in the West and the countries of the Global North. 2) Our elites blame China’s behavior or intentions to divert our attention from their own actions, which are driving our countries into relative decline vis-à-vis China.

First. Democracy is at risk if we let China become more powerful, our leaders say. This is false for two obvious reasons. First, there is no threat to the democratic international order because it is not democratic to begin with : it is a hierarchical one, dominated by the US and its allies in the Global North for decades—or rather centuries. Second, while we could claim that “democracy” at home, in the liberal democracies of the Global North, is at risk, how is Xi Jinping to blame for this ? Is it not figures like Donald Trump, Orban, or Le Pen who pose the most serious threat to democracy ? For those on the left, this might seem clear, but it is not so obvious for large segments of our societies today.

Internationally, the extraordinary growth of China has demonstrated that countries do not need to be democratic to be innovative and have efficient markets. We were not rich due to our purportedly superior values and “free markets.” We were rich due to historical privileges emerging from centuries of colonialism, geography, war, and a good amount of luck. We imposed free trade on others who could not compete with us due to their subordination. And because we were rich and privileged, we could afford the discourse of democracy at home while doing the opposite abroad : who was going to challenge us ? Our global dominance allowed us to thrive in ways difficult to imagine in other parts of the world. How could we now talk about international “democracy” if the core of this concept is equality ?

No, what we fear is not the loss of our values, because if you don’t like them, we always have others. What we fear is that China might one day be in our shoes and treat us as we treated others in the past. After a long era of imposing open markets on other countries, now that we feel relatively subordinated to China’s prowess, we don’t want free trade anymore but protectionism. Capitalism (neoliberal globalist capitalism) was cool while we were the ones having the cake and eating it too. “Communist” China has won at the game of capitalism within the US-led order. We feel ashamed to admit that China might have done things well and worked hard, deserving to be “number one,” so we come up with bad-loser excuses.

For example, let’s talk about the so-called “overcapacity” of China’s electric vehicle industry. The West claims that Chinese factories produce more than Chinese consumers can buy. But this is false compared to Western brands like Volkswagen, Ford, or Toyota. In 2023, Japan produced almost 9 million cars and exported almost 6 million. Germany produced 4.1 million cars and exported 3.1 million. Japan and Germany consume only 33% and 25% of the cars they produce, respectively. In contrast, China produced 30.1 million cars and exported 5.2 million, selling 83% of the cars domestically. So, who has the industrial overcapacity ? The real reason behind this charade is that the Global North does not want people to start buying better and cheaper Chinese cars, leaving their brands with unsold overproduction.

Not only electric cars but also solar panels are under sanctions due to accusations of overcapacity and state subsidies (as if Western countries do not subsidize “green technologies”). Wasn’t saving the planet the main goal ? It seems clear that Western democracies have chosen to save their industries over saving the planet. Instead of receiving Chinese green technology with open arms and thanking them for their industrial and technological effort that could benefit the whole planet, we find ourselves in a trade war to selfishly make a last attempt to keep our economic primacy.

Second. China “the thief” and China “the manipulator,” our leaders repeatedly claim. I do not deny that China has done everything in its power to thrive under Western domination. China played against the rules, but how can we blame it ? Western countries have been stealing and playing dirty since day one. It is not China that stole “our” jobs ; it is Western capitalists who moved their industries abroad in search of more profits. It is not China that forced foreign companies to cede their intellectual property ; it was these companies that agreed because they wanted to make money. Our old economies have survived on cheap Chinese goods and China’s purchase of our increasing debts. The US debt is at unprecedented levels and growing, and the fall from this will make the 2008 financial crisis feel like a child’s tale.

But most of our fellow citizens believe that if things are tough, it is because of China’s malice. This belief is fueled by far-right politicians who blame three enemies for the destruction of our societies : the elites, immigrants, and China. This narrative has persuaded many people and made the elites nervous. As a result, the elites ride the wave and divert attention to China. Mainstream parties have not fully bought the rationale against immigration, but they have embraced the argument that China is the perfect external enemy.

The real “invisible” problem is the West’s incapacity to accept the end of white men’s world dominance. While the West enjoyed a position of dominance and the perks that came with it, we could maintain the facade of democracy’s supremacy and how wonderful free trade was. At home, democracy has lasted because people remained broadly optimistic about the future and accepted the political show that went from election to election while the world evolved, leaving us aside. But that is quickly changing.

The issue of the crazy prices of housing is somewhat connected to this : since we cannot compete with China’s industry, technology, innovation, and logistics, capital is turning to tourism and housing for easy returns, creating another bubble and sacrificing millions of workers in the process. Those who own real estate can still live moderately well, but those who don’t are experiencing a new era of semi-slavery : working to survive. Add to this the damaging social media instilling in us the need to constantly show off, and people spend more than they have, drowning in debt. Many people affected by the cost-of-living crisis see our economies for what they are : systems in decline. It does not matter what GDP figures show ; the personal vibes are negative, and people are pissed off even if they are not directly affected yet (I am okay, but the country is going to hell, they often say). GDP might grow, but the money of that growth goes only to a few pockets. Therefore, people vote for “saviors” that promise to make the country great again, elevating nostalgia of the colonial past. These saviors make immigrants and China the enemy but are still careful with their own capitalists and their system, who enjoyed the benefits of neoliberal globalization while leaving the country only wearing the underwear.

This emerging disparity between the rentier economies of the West, driven by financialisation and short-termism, and the more productive economy of China, which can design long-term plans unbothered by election cycles, drives people to support politicians who promise to contain Beijing rather than address the underlying issue : the need to shift our economic priorities. By reducing the cost of living and ensuring that residents can thrive rather than merely survive, we could build a more equitable and sustainable future for all, even if our GDP was lower, thus lessening international resentment against those who have learned to excel at our own economic game. Unfortunately, the measures chosen are militarism and protectionism aimed at containing China, which, besides being ineffective, only increase inflation, worsening the cost of living and harming those with lower incomes and no housing of their own. Not to mention the costs of increasing militarism that are leading us to a potential future “hot” war.

Now that the West does not enjoy its uncontested position of dominance over the rest, we can see how anti-democratic forces bloom throughout the “democratic West.” For large shares of Westerners today, it does not seem to matter whether we are liberal democracies or something else, as long as “we” remain in primacy (Make America Great Again). The case of Trump is the most obvious one because he openly talks about maintaining global primacy above anything else, no matter what has to be done to achieve it. For them, China becomes the main threat not to our values or our security, as it is commonly described in politically correct language, but to our global privileges.

A funny story : When I lived in China between 2011 and 2013, I asked some Chinese young people their opinion about the CCP “dictatorship” and they said : they are corrupt, yes, but as long as the economy goes well and the future looks bright, it is alright. This was difficult for me to understand at the time ; perhaps I was still affected by Western supremacism, believing that our culture was inherently better and we would never accept something like that. Now, of course, I see that the same applies to us here in the West. We are not different after all : the majority in our society wants prosperity and other issues are secondary. Our self-image of superior values is being dismantled by ourselves when we are faced with the need to accept that we will be number two. Better destruction and injustice than passing the crown...

Juan Alberto Ruiz Casado