I'm a bit more anxious than you are about the rise of China. Five or six years ago I imagined that a world with China as dominant power would be a live and let live affair. You want to be a social democracy? You want to genocide a minority group? China doesn't judge, it'll still trade with you and leave you alone. Frankly, this isn't the worst world order I could imagine.
The combination of increased totalitarianism in China and the assertion, via the Hong Kong security law, that they can police speech outside of China makes me much more nervous. It's not hard to imagine China using economic power or threat of military force to censor dissidents in other countries. Also, while it's hard for me to imagine China just going around trying to conquer other countries like Alexander the Great, I can imagine something more like America or even the British empire, in which "defending commercial interests" leads to meddling and war.
For the record, I like China culturally and I don't want a trade war or real war or anything. I want everyone in the world to prosper and necessarily that outcome would make China a powerful country. I'm just worried.
The Hong Kong Security Law does not imply China can police speech outside China. HK is a Chinese city. If you don't get that, you're still living the 20th century Colonial era.
Right now this seems not very threatening, like that law that allowed Belgium to arrest anyone in the world for war crimes, but if China is a dominant power that's a different matter.
In a few cases Hollywood has curtailed movies with ...modern ideas for almost exclusive release in china because they know there is no way the Chinese government will allow most Hollywood movies to be released in china as is, also weird Hollywood movies just aren't popular in traditional countries but that is a far cry from controlling Hollywood. The Chinese people and then government have repeatedly spoken with their wallets.
The United States allowing most sovereign countries to control their own domestic policy is something the world hasn't seen for approximately 90 years. In any case, who would you rather your masters be? Trade concerned Chinese, or the United States government, the former is a welcomed fantasy for me. I had the privilege of studying in China, and taking a few classes by a former ambassador iirc. Obviously it could have been a lie, but a direct quote "90 percent of Chinese foreign policy is domestic policy."
Meh... not really. I don't see China wanting to extend itself excessively. The HK issue was more of color revolutionists overplaying their hand and also the DPP chipping in so Tsai can win an election back in TW (IMO timing was really impeccable).
There has not been "increased totalitarianism". There's been increased measures to restrain big-C Capital and restrict Western meddling. And consequently, there's been increased hysteria from implicitly pro-capitalist, pro-imperialist Western media. Since HK is part of China, the HK security law in no way attempts to police speech outside of China. I don't know what your US overlords have told you, but the law amounts to stating that when crimes are committed in China, one cannot simply flee to Taiwan or HK to avoid prosecution, equivalent to saying that if you murder someone in Texas, moving to Arizona won't protect you from prosecution.
At the end of the day, China is run by the CPC, and the CPC adheres to Marxist-Leninist-MZT political thought, which means that what you consider "authoritarian" is merely their attempt to implement and maintain a dictatorship of the proletariat. You can argue that this curtails human freedom, I would argue that this is necessary to defend the revolution from counter-revolution or West-sanctioned color revolutions. The vast majority of Chinese people are immensely satisfied with the CPC.
The one place where U.S. may still have an advantage is GDP per capita. I think China will hit a similar ceiling as Japan. The base population is intelligent, but it's not as attractive for the top 0.0001% as somewhere like New York / SF or even Singapore.
if it hits a ceiling like Japan's with a much larger population, it will be a behemoth that will look down on higher GDP per capita countries in the same way the US doesn't have to listen to Switzerland, Norway, Luxembourg etc
How about their demographic crisis? In the next 15-30 years, their working-age population is going to drop drastically while senior citizens will make up a third of their population - with the requisite spending on social security, healthcare, and elderly care. And this was entirely self-inflicted due to the One Child Policy, which totally undermines the CCP's alleged "competence." The problem with the West is not that it underrates China but that it overrates it. Their economy is like a Jenga tower built on a stack of sand, and it's far more likely that they're going to start declining before taking over Asia. This makes them more dangerous, not less - they know they'll have to act soon to achieve long-term geopolitical goals like conquering Taiwan before demographic decline makes it impossible.
What are you smoking about the "conquering Taiwan" lol. Stop projecting settler colonialism BS onto a civilization that did not get to where it currently is.
The CCP openly admits that conquest of the "wayward province" of Taiwan is a long-term goal. They don't even try to hide it. Hope Xi sees your comments here and adds some points to your social credit account.
LOL. You are so creative bud. /s BTW, the U.S. has a much more stealthy Social Credit System than China does, which is still experimental at local and provincial levels. Also, in case you are not following the news in Taiwan currently, it's looking more like a rescue mission for the PLA than an invasion at this point depending on how much further the DPP wants to play the virtue signal game to look good for America.
There is no "conquest" of Taiwan. Taiwan is a part of China, period. If the geopolitical situation were reversed and the KMT won the civil war, the US and the rest of the Western world would almost certainly depict Taiwan as an island of Communist rebels to be quashed like al-Qaeda. The PRC's modern territorial claims, by the way, are actually less than that claimed by the KMT when they were in power. Yet this perception of a revanchist China has only arisen with the CPC in power. Take from that what you will, for me, it's a clear case of anti-Communist, pro-imperialist propaganda that drives the modern day Western perception of the Taiwan issue.
Demographic decline is more applicable to the west then is it to china, and just as China was willing to coerce its citizens into lowering its fertility rate it can get away with doing the same in reverse. Whereas in the west the very idea of encouraging people to have more babies with carots [let alone sticks] is Haram.
Great article and I can't believe that I am only discovering your content now. I am Chinese American myself, and largely share the same opinion as you and Steve Hsu. How would you respond to the offensive realist perspective that eventually, China will have a more aggressive foreign policy?
The fundamental analysis being that China is benign or competent is hard to fathom, considering that China is responsible for mass deaths of its own citizens more than any other country in human history, though a combination of incompetence and the ruling class seeking power for its own sake. There is little doubt that China is a totalitarian system that seeks to severely restrict the freedom of its subjects, and for all the problems of Liberal democracy its still far preferable than being under a Chinese system. Saying that China is benign is also very strange when looking at the aggression and coercion China has exhibited in annexing distinct nations and ethnic groups in Asia, it's outright admission of wanting to annex the independent nation of Taiwan despite its wishes, and its economic coercion of nations not willing to kowtow to the Chinese system (see the tariffs imposed against Australia because we went against China, for example because we forbade Huawei and other Chinese companies from investing in our infrastructure out of national security concerns). No, I regard the idea that China "just wants to be left alone" and would not pursue a global hegemony in the absence of opposition to be ridiculous. We have to choose between China and the US, an being an Australian, I definitely prefer a global US hegemony to a Chinese one, and it's very strange for a white American to be "rooting for the other side" in this sense. An invasion of Taiwan for example should be opposed not just because of geopolitical concerns, but also for the simple principles of freedom, that we should prevent a sovereign nation from being unwillingly annexed and its people subjugated.
Also, on the economic front, the main question of Chinese economic growth is really one of "why has it taken so long" considering China not only has the largest population in the world but an average of 5 more IQ points than the US. I am also wary of extrapolating China's current growth in the future, because there is the issue of diminishing returns, as it's easy to get to a moderate degree of industrial productivity, but much harder to go from there. China has gotten this far by copying from other countries after the disastrous failure of its communist policies, but I am very sceptical of the idea it can surpass this barrier of simply being the world's manufacturing hub to being the main driver of innovation like the US is. The Chinese economy is subservient to the state, and to oversimplify things, I think real innovation requires a degree of autonomy from the state hierarchy that can only found in the US model of liberal capitalism. China may surpass the US in total economy size, but I don't think it will become the main driver of innovation and technology, as the US currently is.
There is another question to ask: will China's economic primacy translate directly into military pre-eminence? From a historical perspective, Europe for example has always been a militaristic society, unlike China who has historically preferred to use financial rather than military means to pay off potential invaders. It has fared poorly wars against smaller and poorer barbarian tribes on its borders. It's an open question whether these historical precedents would change in the modern era, and if China would be able to best the Western powers in any potential proxy wars or limited conflicts that may arise.
Your perspective is incredibly naive and uncritical. The bit about mass deaths is complete unqualified fiction; I can only guess that you're referring to something something great famine and "mUh cUltErAl rEvolUsHun". Deaths in the early development of the PRC were indeed primarily due to starvation, common in countries near the bottom of the world in GDP/capita. Contrary to popular perception, Communists do not control the weather. As for the Cultural revolution, death wasn't an issue so much as imprisonment, and the primary culprit for this was not so much authoritarianism as much as lack thereof.
Taiwan is not an independent nation, you would not characterize it as such if the positions were reversed. The secession of Taiwan or HK from China is about as ludicrous as the secession of the state of Jefferson from California. In fact, more so, since California and the US "nation" have no legitimacy in the first place.
Your entire comment reeks of racialist, fascist ideology.
It seems like the US is losing the hegemony is gained after the collapse of the USSR, and worst yet, China is doing it without nukes or war. Just playing by the rules of trade and economics.
Our political system is freaking out slowly witnessing its power slip, and it can't take it. Especially when it sold its system as the way and reason for its power.
China is also doing it on all fronts. Let's take loans for example. The IMF never gives loans with no minimum or no string attached. It always forces countries to liberalize and open their economies before taking out loans. China doesn't care what your country's political system is or what you do with your economy. It gives you what you need.
Great article!!! Eisenhower warned us about the Military/Industrial complex, and they have grown stronger and more devious since that warning. They fostered the idea of American Exceptionalism to build the weapons that allowed us to rule the world through military might. They foster the idea that Russia, China, and Iran are our enemies and just waiting to attack us. Continued Cold War generates lots of cold cash for them. Paranoia insures big Military budgets and a "race" to make ever better weapons that insure our dominance of the world and their guaranteed profits. The American Century is over. Let's take care of our untended backyard and let them tend to theirs. Mutually beneficial trade instead of mutually aggressive rhetoric benefits everyone. The next battlefield is cyber, and we are way behind because we keep spending so much on military hardware instead of education and infrastructure. We have the newest best missiles and equipment, but far out of date infrastructure running on 20 year old equipment and 30 year old technology. Time for a change.
It's really quite presumptive to assume that the Covid deaths are maliciously underreported by the Chinese government, at least more so than their Western counterparts. I can tell you anecdotally as a Chinese person that not a single person I know back in China, (which constitutes about half the people I know) has contracted or even knows someone who has contracted Covid. On the other hand, up to 3/4ths of my acquaintances here in the US have actually contracted it themselves, including my entire immediate family.
The truth is that the Chinese government is orders of magnitude more transparent than their US counterparts, and your tendency to see things otherwise, through essentially an Orientalist lens, is the product of relentless US media brainwashing. On a similar note, the opinions of Chinese people abroad rarely accurately reflect actual conditions in China, 1) because most of them haven't been back for some time, and 2) by leaving, most of them have made implicit ideological commitments for the Western world and against China and would be about as unbiased about China as a Trump supporter is prone to be unbiased about Biden (and vice versa, obviously).
" they [US politicians] are committed to a worldview in which, no matter how pessimistic they get about American institutions, no alternative to liberal democracy can outcompete it."
Great comment, Alex. I thought the same as you when I read the above quote by Hanania... "Is China a threat" is a moot question, the profound corruption of the US political system is the only threat. As of today, said system has very little to do with liberalism and democracy, as the past year and elections have proved beyond any doubt.
Hanania failed in basic analysis - the chart he posted shows that China grew exclusively at the expense of the US, the rest of the world kept near constant share of GDP while China was eating the American lunch served to her by our outsourcing-crazy political, financial and big business elites. This is the story to tell, it's not morbid predictions based on gypsy hand-charting while the underlying processes remain in the dark.
Hanania seems to lack knowledge of economics, without that, it's impossible to figure out what went (and is still going) wrong. He, like many others, seems to blame democracy and liberalism which are nothing but empty labels now... however one needs to really understand economics in order to see that fact. I only mention this because blaming the very foundations of American political culture creates grave dangers for this country, it's death by another name - without any exaggeration.
It's not accurate to look at that chart and assume that China took America's share of growth. To claim that, you must show that if growth in China didn't occur, then that growth would've occurred in the US, which is frankly ludicrous. Do you honestly think that without China's presence, US GDP would be nearly twice what it is now?
I'm a bit more anxious than you are about the rise of China. Five or six years ago I imagined that a world with China as dominant power would be a live and let live affair. You want to be a social democracy? You want to genocide a minority group? China doesn't judge, it'll still trade with you and leave you alone. Frankly, this isn't the worst world order I could imagine.
The combination of increased totalitarianism in China and the assertion, via the Hong Kong security law, that they can police speech outside of China makes me much more nervous. It's not hard to imagine China using economic power or threat of military force to censor dissidents in other countries. Also, while it's hard for me to imagine China just going around trying to conquer other countries like Alexander the Great, I can imagine something more like America or even the British empire, in which "defending commercial interests" leads to meddling and war.
For the record, I like China culturally and I don't want a trade war or real war or anything. I want everyone in the world to prosper and necessarily that outcome would make China a powerful country. I'm just worried.
The Hong Kong Security Law does not imply China can police speech outside China. HK is a Chinese city. If you don't get that, you're still living the 20th century Colonial era.
I'm fine being corrected if this is not true, but I've read the claim that it asserts the ability to arrest people for speech outside Hong Kong or China (see Part 5 here: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/07/hong-kong-national-security-law-10-things-you-need-to-know/)
Right now this seems not very threatening, like that law that allowed Belgium to arrest anyone in the world for war crimes, but if China is a dominant power that's a different matter.
True. But hollywood is in california and China polices speech there quite effectively.
In a few cases Hollywood has curtailed movies with ...modern ideas for almost exclusive release in china because they know there is no way the Chinese government will allow most Hollywood movies to be released in china as is, also weird Hollywood movies just aren't popular in traditional countries but that is a far cry from controlling Hollywood. The Chinese people and then government have repeatedly spoken with their wallets.
The United States allowing most sovereign countries to control their own domestic policy is something the world hasn't seen for approximately 90 years. In any case, who would you rather your masters be? Trade concerned Chinese, or the United States government, the former is a welcomed fantasy for me. I had the privilege of studying in China, and taking a few classes by a former ambassador iirc. Obviously it could have been a lie, but a direct quote "90 percent of Chinese foreign policy is domestic policy."
Meh... not really. I don't see China wanting to extend itself excessively. The HK issue was more of color revolutionists overplaying their hand and also the DPP chipping in so Tsai can win an election back in TW (IMO timing was really impeccable).
There has not been "increased totalitarianism". There's been increased measures to restrain big-C Capital and restrict Western meddling. And consequently, there's been increased hysteria from implicitly pro-capitalist, pro-imperialist Western media. Since HK is part of China, the HK security law in no way attempts to police speech outside of China. I don't know what your US overlords have told you, but the law amounts to stating that when crimes are committed in China, one cannot simply flee to Taiwan or HK to avoid prosecution, equivalent to saying that if you murder someone in Texas, moving to Arizona won't protect you from prosecution.
At the end of the day, China is run by the CPC, and the CPC adheres to Marxist-Leninist-MZT political thought, which means that what you consider "authoritarian" is merely their attempt to implement and maintain a dictatorship of the proletariat. You can argue that this curtails human freedom, I would argue that this is necessary to defend the revolution from counter-revolution or West-sanctioned color revolutions. The vast majority of Chinese people are immensely satisfied with the CPC.
The one place where U.S. may still have an advantage is GDP per capita. I think China will hit a similar ceiling as Japan. The base population is intelligent, but it's not as attractive for the top 0.0001% as somewhere like New York / SF or even Singapore.
if it hits a ceiling like Japan's with a much larger population, it will be a behemoth that will look down on higher GDP per capita countries in the same way the US doesn't have to listen to Switzerland, Norway, Luxembourg etc
How about their demographic crisis? In the next 15-30 years, their working-age population is going to drop drastically while senior citizens will make up a third of their population - with the requisite spending on social security, healthcare, and elderly care. And this was entirely self-inflicted due to the One Child Policy, which totally undermines the CCP's alleged "competence." The problem with the West is not that it underrates China but that it overrates it. Their economy is like a Jenga tower built on a stack of sand, and it's far more likely that they're going to start declining before taking over Asia. This makes them more dangerous, not less - they know they'll have to act soon to achieve long-term geopolitical goals like conquering Taiwan before demographic decline makes it impossible.
What are you smoking about the "conquering Taiwan" lol. Stop projecting settler colonialism BS onto a civilization that did not get to where it currently is.
The CCP openly admits that conquest of the "wayward province" of Taiwan is a long-term goal. They don't even try to hide it. Hope Xi sees your comments here and adds some points to your social credit account.
LOL. You are so creative bud. /s BTW, the U.S. has a much more stealthy Social Credit System than China does, which is still experimental at local and provincial levels. Also, in case you are not following the news in Taiwan currently, it's looking more like a rescue mission for the PLA than an invasion at this point depending on how much further the DPP wants to play the virtue signal game to look good for America.
There is no "conquest" of Taiwan. Taiwan is a part of China, period. If the geopolitical situation were reversed and the KMT won the civil war, the US and the rest of the Western world would almost certainly depict Taiwan as an island of Communist rebels to be quashed like al-Qaeda. The PRC's modern territorial claims, by the way, are actually less than that claimed by the KMT when they were in power. Yet this perception of a revanchist China has only arisen with the CPC in power. Take from that what you will, for me, it's a clear case of anti-Communist, pro-imperialist propaganda that drives the modern day Western perception of the Taiwan issue.
China's goal reunification. Whether that occurs by peaceful means or kinetic means is America's decision.
And ours is built on what?
Demographic decline is more applicable to the west then is it to china, and just as China was willing to coerce its citizens into lowering its fertility rate it can get away with doing the same in reverse. Whereas in the west the very idea of encouraging people to have more babies with carots [let alone sticks] is Haram.
Asians were harmed by slow vaccine regulations in the past. Faulty products go to Asia.
Great article and I can't believe that I am only discovering your content now. I am Chinese American myself, and largely share the same opinion as you and Steve Hsu. How would you respond to the offensive realist perspective that eventually, China will have a more aggressive foreign policy?
“ but not given credit for how well they’ve handled the disease”
-aging badly
The fundamental analysis being that China is benign or competent is hard to fathom, considering that China is responsible for mass deaths of its own citizens more than any other country in human history, though a combination of incompetence and the ruling class seeking power for its own sake. There is little doubt that China is a totalitarian system that seeks to severely restrict the freedom of its subjects, and for all the problems of Liberal democracy its still far preferable than being under a Chinese system. Saying that China is benign is also very strange when looking at the aggression and coercion China has exhibited in annexing distinct nations and ethnic groups in Asia, it's outright admission of wanting to annex the independent nation of Taiwan despite its wishes, and its economic coercion of nations not willing to kowtow to the Chinese system (see the tariffs imposed against Australia because we went against China, for example because we forbade Huawei and other Chinese companies from investing in our infrastructure out of national security concerns). No, I regard the idea that China "just wants to be left alone" and would not pursue a global hegemony in the absence of opposition to be ridiculous. We have to choose between China and the US, an being an Australian, I definitely prefer a global US hegemony to a Chinese one, and it's very strange for a white American to be "rooting for the other side" in this sense. An invasion of Taiwan for example should be opposed not just because of geopolitical concerns, but also for the simple principles of freedom, that we should prevent a sovereign nation from being unwillingly annexed and its people subjugated.
Also, on the economic front, the main question of Chinese economic growth is really one of "why has it taken so long" considering China not only has the largest population in the world but an average of 5 more IQ points than the US. I am also wary of extrapolating China's current growth in the future, because there is the issue of diminishing returns, as it's easy to get to a moderate degree of industrial productivity, but much harder to go from there. China has gotten this far by copying from other countries after the disastrous failure of its communist policies, but I am very sceptical of the idea it can surpass this barrier of simply being the world's manufacturing hub to being the main driver of innovation like the US is. The Chinese economy is subservient to the state, and to oversimplify things, I think real innovation requires a degree of autonomy from the state hierarchy that can only found in the US model of liberal capitalism. China may surpass the US in total economy size, but I don't think it will become the main driver of innovation and technology, as the US currently is.
There is another question to ask: will China's economic primacy translate directly into military pre-eminence? From a historical perspective, Europe for example has always been a militaristic society, unlike China who has historically preferred to use financial rather than military means to pay off potential invaders. It has fared poorly wars against smaller and poorer barbarian tribes on its borders. It's an open question whether these historical precedents would change in the modern era, and if China would be able to best the Western powers in any potential proxy wars or limited conflicts that may arise.
Your perspective is incredibly naive and uncritical. The bit about mass deaths is complete unqualified fiction; I can only guess that you're referring to something something great famine and "mUh cUltErAl rEvolUsHun". Deaths in the early development of the PRC were indeed primarily due to starvation, common in countries near the bottom of the world in GDP/capita. Contrary to popular perception, Communists do not control the weather. As for the Cultural revolution, death wasn't an issue so much as imprisonment, and the primary culprit for this was not so much authoritarianism as much as lack thereof.
Taiwan is not an independent nation, you would not characterize it as such if the positions were reversed. The secession of Taiwan or HK from China is about as ludicrous as the secession of the state of Jefferson from California. In fact, more so, since California and the US "nation" have no legitimacy in the first place.
Your entire comment reeks of racialist, fascist ideology.
It seems like the US is losing the hegemony is gained after the collapse of the USSR, and worst yet, China is doing it without nukes or war. Just playing by the rules of trade and economics.
Our political system is freaking out slowly witnessing its power slip, and it can't take it. Especially when it sold its system as the way and reason for its power.
China is also doing it on all fronts. Let's take loans for example. The IMF never gives loans with no minimum or no string attached. It always forces countries to liberalize and open their economies before taking out loans. China doesn't care what your country's political system is or what you do with your economy. It gives you what you need.
I like this. It's very pragmatic and doesn't try and sell me emotions, and fears of whoever wants to influence me.
China did not steal the Presidency, erect a Green Zone in DC or overthrow the Republic.
It would also be a bit more credible if our illustrious leaders weren’t on the take from China, but they are...
No. Hard pass, and the author is correct.
What exact scenario would result in a nuclear war? Seems extremely unlikely to me.
Great article!!! Eisenhower warned us about the Military/Industrial complex, and they have grown stronger and more devious since that warning. They fostered the idea of American Exceptionalism to build the weapons that allowed us to rule the world through military might. They foster the idea that Russia, China, and Iran are our enemies and just waiting to attack us. Continued Cold War generates lots of cold cash for them. Paranoia insures big Military budgets and a "race" to make ever better weapons that insure our dominance of the world and their guaranteed profits. The American Century is over. Let's take care of our untended backyard and let them tend to theirs. Mutually beneficial trade instead of mutually aggressive rhetoric benefits everyone. The next battlefield is cyber, and we are way behind because we keep spending so much on military hardware instead of education and infrastructure. We have the newest best missiles and equipment, but far out of date infrastructure running on 20 year old equipment and 30 year old technology. Time for a change.
Bot
https://tsangchungshu.medium.com/the-monopoly-of-legitimate-benevolence-549f778515cc
If you want a different angle of East Asia than you get in most of mainstream outlets.
It's really quite presumptive to assume that the Covid deaths are maliciously underreported by the Chinese government, at least more so than their Western counterparts. I can tell you anecdotally as a Chinese person that not a single person I know back in China, (which constitutes about half the people I know) has contracted or even knows someone who has contracted Covid. On the other hand, up to 3/4ths of my acquaintances here in the US have actually contracted it themselves, including my entire immediate family.
The truth is that the Chinese government is orders of magnitude more transparent than their US counterparts, and your tendency to see things otherwise, through essentially an Orientalist lens, is the product of relentless US media brainwashing. On a similar note, the opinions of Chinese people abroad rarely accurately reflect actual conditions in China, 1) because most of them haven't been back for some time, and 2) by leaving, most of them have made implicit ideological commitments for the Western world and against China and would be about as unbiased about China as a Trump supporter is prone to be unbiased about Biden (and vice versa, obviously).
" they [US politicians] are committed to a worldview in which, no matter how pessimistic they get about American institutions, no alternative to liberal democracy can outcompete it."
Great comment, Alex. I thought the same as you when I read the above quote by Hanania... "Is China a threat" is a moot question, the profound corruption of the US political system is the only threat. As of today, said system has very little to do with liberalism and democracy, as the past year and elections have proved beyond any doubt.
Hanania failed in basic analysis - the chart he posted shows that China grew exclusively at the expense of the US, the rest of the world kept near constant share of GDP while China was eating the American lunch served to her by our outsourcing-crazy political, financial and big business elites. This is the story to tell, it's not morbid predictions based on gypsy hand-charting while the underlying processes remain in the dark.
Hanania seems to lack knowledge of economics, without that, it's impossible to figure out what went (and is still going) wrong. He, like many others, seems to blame democracy and liberalism which are nothing but empty labels now... however one needs to really understand economics in order to see that fact. I only mention this because blaming the very foundations of American political culture creates grave dangers for this country, it's death by another name - without any exaggeration.
It's not accurate to look at that chart and assume that China took America's share of growth. To claim that, you must show that if growth in China didn't occur, then that growth would've occurred in the US, which is frankly ludicrous. Do you honestly think that without China's presence, US GDP would be nearly twice what it is now?