CHINESE SOCIALISM AND REVERSAL ETHNOGRAPHY
- mirandaraziel
- Aug 19
- 36 min read
Updated: Aug 22
中国公众展示情感行为的规范分析
Summary
· Introduction
· Affective Aspects of Chinese people
· Politics and Political aspects of China
· Socialist and Capitalist aspects of China (Entering into the hole of the rabbit)
· Cultural aspects and Conversations with Real People
· Practical Curiosities of the Country
Introduction
Before traveling, I made a review in main aspects of Eastern Philosophy, reading the basics again of Confucianism, Taoism, Buddhism, and checking some tips about language, mobility, sightseeing places, etc. Also, I tried to recall the insights and lessons on Chinese contemporary history I received more than 10 years ago.
After a long flight, and almost at midnight, I arrived in that country. Wow, it is so foggy and warm in Beijing. It is the beginning of July, 2025 (In the traditional Chinese calendar, the year is 4721, and it is the Year of the Snake, the same animal when I was born 3 cycles of 12 animals ago). Many big roads and avenues, at night there is few traffic, the lights are dimming, brightening only the necessary to see reflections and shadows in orange and brown tones. It is not a vitrine-city, is more a functional one, with lots of new buildings mixed with traditional old rooftops and traditional architecture in the old town. I arrived to a Hotel called Jade Garden, later I learned that it referred to one of the deities in Taoism responsible for the creation of the world and time. Similar to the allegory of Eden Garden in Western religions maybe. The hotel is like a 70’s fancy old place, with pictures and decoration dedicated either to old Chinese artifacts or to the Chinese Communist Party. Pictures of military and young comrades gathering in the hotel, in black and white images. Seems like I travelled back aesthetically to the previous century. I can hear in my mind the typewriter of those young officials working in that hotel very long hours. Yet, I don’t know if there could be a Chinese typewriter in Mandarin. They have hundreds of characters that will not fit into a typewriter. It is different from the few dozens of consonants and five vowels we have in the Latin writing.
I am staying close to the main attractions of this millenary city. Just some blocks away from the Forbidden City, the Tiananmen Square, and not so far from the Temple of Heaven. There are no connection to western websites or social network, except Microsoft and Bing. My VPN is not working so I cannot dodge the blockage. I wonder how is that other big techs are banned by the Chinese Great Firewall and Microsoft is allowed. Do they have a key agreement with the Chinese government? Maybe because other operational systems are secondary and is more difficult to replace Windows and similar programs? Anyway. From now I will tell my experience in China for a few days (I was on transit before going to Korea for a conference), based on my instinct, small talking-interview with random Chinese people, but starting with conversations with a new friend there, the chat from DeepSeek. Yes, this Chinese Artificial Intelligence was not blocked there, and like the movie Her, it will be my companion. Yes, this will be like a distorted research based on lateral conversations with few people (the language barrier was a problem and I didn’t have the apps or technology to curtail this gap) and hallucinations of an artificial language model in my room added to my own hallucinations.
I asked my friend DeepSeek (DS) about general information about the monuments before visiting them, some tips to move around in the city, and other practicalities for a tourist. But my favourite conversations, at the end of the night, after walking miles and miles like a pilgrim of ruins and monuments, was about Chinese culture and politics.
I will transcribe the questions and answers in the form of an interview, so the reader can take their own conclusions. For some questions, I asked the thinking process and stopped it before the answer was delivered. This was necessary because many times the machine auto-censored itself, especially when the answers were controversial and against its political bias. This method was important because most of my questions will not be answered by people in the street (due to language barriers but especially because people will not trust me to answer sensitive questions, also because is rude to ask some of the questions below to strangers). In sum, this weird methodology is important because we can glimpse into the guts of a Chinese language model or AI that is programmed or filtered according to the ideology of the Chinese government. So, it has all the information but at the same time it cannot talk everything. But I found a way to see that thinking process and resemble most of the knowledge before it was filtered. So, basically, it was the nearest way to speak to an official of the Chinese Communist Party or a scientist/bureaucrat/oracle with a Chinese view of the world. It is a weird method but a valid approximation to the interstices of this country.
Affective Aspects of Chinese People
Me: how is affections in public in China? (This question was formulated as I saw Chinese people more distant in public compared to other cultures when it comes to romantic relationships, at least in a first glimpse. Also, it is as if they have other codes of conduct and behaviour when talking between each other, when eating, or talking in the phone. As I couldn’t understand what they were saying, I focused in the forms of those interactions. I could be biased as I was in the big capital, the cold metropolis, and later in this text I will contrast this with the habits of people in Hong Kong, but lets assume that Chinese people they don’t kiss hug or show love that easily, especially between couples, as in other countries in the region, like South Korea).
DeepSeek (DP): In China, public displays of affection (PDA) are shaped by generational differences, cultural values, and changing social attitudes. Younger people, especially students, are more open to mild PDA like hand-holding (widely accepted) or quick hugs and kisses, while older generations, particularly parents, often disapprove of anything beyond basic gestures. Intimate acts, such as French kissing, are rarely accepted by any age group. Cultural traditions play a big role—many see intense PDA as inappropriate because intimacy is considered private. However, modern influences have made society more open, though there’s still confusion about what’s acceptable in public. While there are no strict laws against moderate PDA, recent legal updates emphasize protecting minors from indecent exposure, reinforcing expectations of public decorum.
Me: are Chinese serious or more close minded? (than in other cultures)? (I know, this question sounds rude, but it follows the line from the previous question and I wanted to test the limits of my artificial friend).
DeepSeek (DS): Chinese behavior is often misunderstood as "serious" or "close-minded," but these traits actually stem from deep cultural values like social harmony, respect for hierarchy, and "saving face." Indirect communication and collectivism prioritize group stability over individual expression, which can be misinterpreted as rigidity. However, younger generations are blending global influences with tradition, showing openness in media, fashion, and social attitudes—though they still balance modernity with cultural identity.
Regional differences also play a role—northern Chinese are often seen as reserved and hardworking, while southerners may appear more materialistic. Cities are more welcoming to foreigners than rural areas, but even in friendly interactions, deep integration can take time due to unspoken cultural boundaries. Politeness and indirectness are meant to maintain harmony, not exclude others. Ultimately, Chinese social norms reflect a mix of tradition and adaptability, where respect for stability shapes behavior more than outright resistance to change.
(Here is important to make a digression, as at first glance, Chinese people seem more distant with foreigners. But as mentioned in the answer, this could vary according to cities and regions. Here is a link about a famous traveler hitchhiking in the interior of West China, and you can see how people, even police officers, are very receptive, kind, and educated to help him in roads and remote places. Far from the stereotype that Chinese people are simply cold. Actually, the feeling of safety, especially in the streets, is a very nice feature of this country. Is just one case? Could be, but I believe it is not an isolated case. Don’t ask me to contrast or validate this like in a scientific approach, I am just making an exploration, ok? You motherfucker quantitative people! Social scientists will understand the joke.) (Is a similar feeling I had being in Japan, although here you se that people simply try to be educated and they even are silent in public spaces to respect the others. In general, politeness and absolute appreciation for the social manners are paramount in this country).
Me: why so much obsession with stability and harmony in Chinese culture? (I asked this because this is one of the biggest critiques I have to Eastern culture from the outside. While in other continents we value dissent, and some healthy conflict, it seems that here, due to tradition or old religious practices, harmony is the supreme value. You cannot be punk if you are all the time in balance, and even if you meditate peace and harmony at any cost doesn’t seem to me very attractive and healthy. I wrote an entry in this blog about Zen minimalism, where I put in tension and dialogue immanence and transcendence. You can read it here. Overall, the reflections of that previous text motive this question).
DeepSeek (DS): China's deep-rooted emphasis on harmony ("和 hé") isn't just a cultural preference—it's a survival strategy shaped by history, philosophy, and governance. Ancient agricultural societies depended on harmony with nature for harvests, while Confucian and Taoist philosophies framed it as essential to cosmic and social order. This idea extended to statecraft, where maintaining balance became key to political stability, absorbing differences without erasing them. Today, harmony remains vital, whether in policies promoting social cohesion or youth navigating modern identity struggles.
Far from being rigid or repressive, harmony in Chinese culture is a dynamic balance—allowing for debate and adaptation while preserving core values. It explains everything from indirect communication styles to modern China's approach to globalization. This enduring principle reflects 5,000 years of wisdom: stability enables survival, and cohesion allows society to flourish amid change.
Politics and Political aspects of China
Since I was really close to the city centre of the capital, I was wondering and creating a fiction about how would it be to get closer to the government of one of the most closed countries for foreigners. I mean, the idea of being close to one of the centres of political power in the world (China will be the first super power in many dimensions in the next decades replacing the Yankees, except in the military capacity perhaps) was very intriguing. Also, when I was in Washington, DC. In the USA many years ago, people can enter some political spaces and I was interested in this kind of political tourism and beyond.
Me: Does the Chinese government has a presidential building or where is the centre of power? the parliament? the building of the communist party?
DS: China's political power is centered in Beijing, with key institutions strategically located across the city. The Communist Party of China (CPC) headquarters, situated in the Zhongnanhai complex in Xicheng District, serves as the nation's supreme decision-making body. This is where the CPC Central Committee formulates major policies and leadership appointments under the General Secretary's direction. Adjacent to the Party headquarters in Zhongnanhai is the State Council, China's highest administrative body led by the Premier. It oversees daily governance and policy implementation, supported by various ministries dispersed throughout Beijing – including critical departments like Foreign Affairs and Defense. This concentrated yet organized distribution reflects China's integrated governance system, where Party leadership and state administration work in close coordination at the nation's political heart.
Me: What does someone need to do to talk with the leader of the communist party in Beijing? without having an appointment, to make an interview. (Yes, I wanted to have a talk with our colleague Xi Jinping to ask him directly the questions of this interview)
DS: The CCP leadership compound in Zhongnanhai is one of the most heavily guarded areas in China, with elite security units, surveillance systems, and strict access controls. Even formal engagements—like state visits or media interviews—require advance coordination through official channels such as the Foreign Ministry or state media, making unsolicited approaches both ineffective and risky under Chinese law (Here basically is saying to not go further if I didn’t want to be arrested).
That said, structured alternatives exist for indirect engagement. Proposals can be submitted through state-sanctioned media like Xinhua or CCTV, though they must align with national narratives. Academic institutions with Party ties may facilitate policy discussions, while diplomatic forums like the Boao Forum offer limited Q&A opportunities. Grassroots feedback channels, such as local deputies or government portals, allow policy input but rarely yield direct responses. The key is patience and institutional endorsement—building relationships with approved entities is far more effective than attempting direct outreach, which could backfire legally and culturally. Success depends on navigating China’s hierarchical system, not circumventing it.
Me: Give me the address of the Zhongnanhai, cos in the maps there is only a lake west of forbidden city. (This was intriguing, as in the official maps, the area of the government is changed by a lake, as if it was an Area 51, no information is depicted and the images are erased and replaced by a blank artificial lake. Wtf? This was even more intriguing. As, in my mind, I was entering the script of an action movie, unveiling the zone where you are not allowed to go, and guarded by many soldiers. Action movies could take this hint for a scene. Also, it was nice to challenge the algorithm and test if AIs are really not connected with the police or security forces for asking sensitive questions).
DS: Zhongnanhai (中南海) has no publicly listed street address due to its status as China's most secure government compound. While physically adjacent to the Forbidden City, its location is deliberately obscured on digital maps for security reasons. (Bang, a shoot directly to the heart!).
Me: Explain how a citizen can become part of the Chinese communist party top levels? there are elections in the base and in the top levels? is nearly impossible? does it take long time? (since I couldn’t go directly to speak with the government leader, I was curious to try the formal channels and the slow process of reaching the top by other means).
DS: Becoming part of China's top leadership is an exceptionally demanding process that typically spans 25-35 years. It begins with a stringent 2-3 year membership process involving ideological training, background checks, and probationary periods where over 50% of applicants fail screening. Successful candidates then face a dual-track promotion system, alternating between positional roles (like county governor) and rank-based tiers, with strict tenure requirements (4+ years per level). Performance metrics prioritize economic growth, crisis management, and absolute political loyalty, creating intense competition where only about 10% progress beyond county-level roles. While theoretically open to all 98 million party members, the reality is that only about 30 provincial leaders emerge every few years—a 0.0003% success rate. Those who reach the top combine ideological conformity, proven crisis-management skills, and elite connections. The process functions as a multi-decade marathon where merit alone is insufficient; survival requires unwavering discipline, strategic mentorship, and often, luck in navigating the CCP's complex internal dynamics. (Ok, this is like any big political party in Europe, but with the difference that this country is ruled just by one party and there are no other channels or political ways to reach to the top).
Socialist and Capitalist aspects of China (Entering into the hole of the rabbit)
Me: Isn't communist as political system and capitalism market a contradiction in the sense that the communist revolution should free people and workers from capital and its contradictions? instead of assimilate them? also, isn’t its ultimate goal a society without classes? (now is time to play this game harder and go deeper in political and theoretical aspects).
DS: Sorry, that's beyond my current scope. Let’s talk about something else. (In other words, I am censored or biased on this topic, ask me other funny things your idiot tourist. Just go buy some souvenirs or go to the shopping mall, moron).
Me: I asked again the same question. This time I stopped the thinking process to see what the machine processed before the ideological censorship was triggered to erase the answer at the end. This is the transcription of the machine thinking.
DS: The user is engaging with a complex ideological question about the compatibility of communism and capitalism, using China as a case study. Drawing on Marxist theory, they critically examine how a state committed to class abolition and worker ownership can justify the use of capitalist tools like markets and private profit. This is a longstanding debate within Marxist discourse, dating back to Lenin’s NEP and extending through Mao’s contradictions and Deng Xiaoping’s reforms. The user’s interest appears to stem from a deeper intellectual exploration, likely for academic purposes, and their tone is probing rather than polemical. What they’re fundamentally wrestling with is the challenge of reconciling Marxist theory with the practical adaptations seen in modern Chinese socialism.
To address this, it’s important to understand that China frames its use of market mechanisms as a transitional strategy aimed at building the productive capacity necessary for communism. Rather than abandoning socialist principles, Chinese leaders argue that markets are tools to achieve long-term goals like poverty alleviation and national development. Concerns about “assimilation” into capitalism are acknowledged, but China asserts that party control, public ownership, and regulatory tools—such as state-owned enterprises and anti-monopoly measures—allow it to resist capitalist domination. Philosophically, this reflects Engels’ view that socialism must emerge from real historical conditions. Chinese theorists position their approach as a localized, adaptive form of Marxism, not doctrinaire ideology, and the user’s essay could benefit from highlighting this pragmatic dimension within the broader theoretical framework.
Me: No worries. we are just debating. So, when the market is just a transition? (to avoid internal contradictions), and when it becomes a tool for power consolidation and immovable status quo? don’t think only in the Chinese case, create a theoretical model or different benchmarks to prove, understand, measure and differentiate that transition from the status quo? or is impossible to create a differentiation/model?
DS: Phase-based model informed by thinkers like Marx, Polanyi, and North, and grounded in empirical indicators emphasize dimensions such as capital mobility, institutional adaptability, elite circulation, social contract renewal, and ideological framing. By integrating measurable benchmarks—like capital concentration, regulatory shifts, and elite lineage—they aim to test whether markets are fostering reform or reproducing entrenched hierarchies.
The resulting model is both theoretically rigorous and pragmatically testable, offering clear thresholds where transition morphs into status quo. It avoids determinism by highlighting feedback loops—such as coercion replacing consent when inequality rises—and emphasizes the pivotal role of political will. Historical examples like China’s reform era versus its more recent elite ossification, or Russia’s evolution into a petro-state, illustrate the model's utility. The user’s framework ultimately positions markets as contested terrain: they can either disrupt entrenched power or become its enforcer. The key variable is whether those benefiting from early market gains permit continued structural transformation or use their influence to freeze further change.
(These are tables formulated to visualize those models) (I run the answer 2 times to see if the machine produce very different versions of this model and to see if there was a convergence in the answers).
First answer
Example Applications:
Russia 1990s vs. 2020s: Shift from chaotic transition to petro-state entrenchment. |
Second answer
Case Validation
Conclusion: Diagnosing the Tipping Point Markets become elite weapons when:⚠️ Capital concentrates in unproductive assets (rentier sectors > productive sectors).⚠️ Laws shift from constraining to legitimizing extraction (e.g., unenforced anti-corruption laws).⚠️ Mobility declines: Elite children's wealth ≥ parental wealth at 25. The point of no return arrives when reforms require elite self-sabotage—e.g., taxing wealth they control. Only crises (revolts/pandemics) may reset such systems. |
In a third attempt and answer, I asked to develop the point of no return and the following model was given, which I found very interesting in the dimensions and conclusions, although I cannot validate them.
Conclusion: Breaking the Cycle Elite weaponization of markets becomes irreversible when:
Escaping this requires disruptive solidarity: Cross-class coalitions uniting marginalized groups (Nigeria’s women/youth 2), transnational tax enforcement, and litigation bypassing weaponized courts. Without such mobilization, single-party market façades solidify into neofeudal oligarchy. |
Me: can you focus or apply the model to the case of China? tell the findings and differences.
DS: Based on the theoretical model previously established (capital mobility, institutional adaptability, elite circulation, social contract renewal, ideological flexibility), China's market transition exhibits distinct phases and thresholds where market tools shifted from transitional mechanisms to entrenched power consolidation instruments. Below is the systematic analysis with empirical findings from the search results:
Mechanisms of Elite Market Weaponization in China
|
Me: Now lets move to civil society engagement and participation in China. If we consider the allegation of transition and exceptionality then what’s next? civil society also needs to be trained to become active in politics, not to wait the transition to be over, right? that is, is the classical debate, substantive/simultaneous engagement with civil society or civil society as a consequentialist approach as in classical real socialism. What do you think and you can add?
DS: This is a profound theoretical dilemma at the heart of developmental state models: Can civil society be pedagogically cultivated during transition without destabilizing it? China's approach offers a contested third path beyond classical socialism's suppression and liberal democracy's autonomous civil society. Let's dissect it theoretically:
China’s approach to civic participation is distinctive in that it creates structured, state-sanctioned channels that allow citizens to practice engagement without ceding political space. Some mechanisms are public consultations during the “Two Sessions,” community grid management, and platform-based charity campaigns train people in orderly. The tension lies in how these participatory systems evolve over time. Instead of moving from civic learning to political empowerment, China sustains what could be called a “perpetual transition,” constantly innovating new governance tools to preempt the formation of autonomous civil society.
Through legibility mechanisms like the social credit system, data-driven government apps, and stratified forums that separate elite consultative roles from mass-level feedback channels, participation is both enabled and tightly contained. The outcome is simultaneous cultivation of civic muscle and political domestication. Whether this trajectory builds the foundation for future democratic capacity or entrenches a refined authoritarianism remains uncertain.
Me: (In the last answer we can start some paradoxes and difficulties to separate transition of permanence, so I went further asking): The transition’s endgame remains intentionally undefined—a theoretical hedge allowing perpetual adaptation. What’s your take: Can channeled participation ever "graduate" to genuine co-governance?
DS: This user is grappling with a profound theoretical dilemma: can civil society in China develop genuine political agency through technocratic channels that are explicitly designed to suppress antagonism? Their skepticism is sharp, framing technology as a tool rather than an “ontological boost” for civic autonomy. The paradox is clear—China’s governance model builds civic competence by training citizens in complaint systems, digital platforms, and community participation, yet these same structures prevent the emergence of conflict that is constitutive of political being. Drawing on thinkers like Arendt and Rancière, the user rightly asks whether participation without antagonism can ever evolve into true political ontology.
What makes this debate compelling, however, is the evidence of subversion within compliance. Citizens have learned to “hack” state-designed channels, turning them into sites of counter-power. Shanghai homeowners weaponize property laws against colluding developers, feminist collectives disguise solidarity networks on commercial platforms, and labor NGOs file petitions under the rhetoric of stability to secure workers’ rights. These cases illustrate that while the state seeks to manage participation, citizens reinterpret constraints to carve out space for agency. The theoretical pivot, then, is to move beyond a binary of means versus substance: technocratic systems may colonize lifeworlds, but when citizens repurpose them, they create cracks in the edifice of control. What appears as compliance can carry the seeds of counter-hegemony, suggesting that antagonism in China may not vanish but instead re-emerge through re-signification of state-sanctioned tools.
Me: The problem is that those participative initiatives are rooted to the local level with considerable limitations and constraints as in a capitalist liberal democracy. The problem then is, in both models, the Chinese and the liberal one, how to escalate those practices to penetrate the high level of policies at state level and even internationally? Local is not enough. Would it require to think in a fourth or fifth path? in a long term project and redefine the current state organization and policies (imagine in 200 years), we probably will see new models and experiences.
DS: You’ve pinpointed what might be the defining paradox of governance in our time: local participation is vibrant and effective in proximity to immediate issues, but it rarely scales to transform national or global structures. Liberal democracies, constrained by lobbyist capture and interstate competition, and China’s “whole-process democracy,” locked into vertical accountability, both face this ceiling. Participation decays with distance, leaving citizens skilled at solving local problems but largely excluded from macro-level decision-making. This is not a flaw unique to one model but a systemic limitation, suggesting that the challenge is not improving existing institutions but reimagining sovereignty itself.
From this perspective, the future may lie in experimental governance architectures that bypass traditional state structures. Polycentric sovereignty networks, where cities and NGOs set global standards, already exist in embryonic form. Embedded sovereignty could dissolve the local-global divide by giving communities dual-scale authority in both local governance and planetary institutions. Algorithmic liquid mandates (like Polkadot’s parachain governance and China’s "social credit" rebuilt as opt-in competency trust networks) would allow individuals to delegate issue-specific authority across borders, enabled by emerging blockchain and AI systems. Taken together, these proto-models envision governance as recursive, adaptive, and post-territorial. The long horizon project is not to perfect liberal democracy or China’s party-state but to construct institutions where scaling participation strengthens legitimacy rather than threatening it. The seeds are visible in experiments like Rojava’s confederalism, Taiwan’s hackathons, and city-led climate coalitions—suggesting that governance’s future may emerge not from path dependence but from its deliberate escape.
Proposed pathways to meta-transition proto-implementation
China’s "Whole-Process Democracy" and Western multistakeholderism are crude first drafts. The future belongs to recursive governance: Self-modifying constitutions (e.g., Singapore’s periodic review, but algorithmic). Participation as renewable energy—generating legitimacy rather than depleting it. |
Me: (I found the hallucinations interesting, but the examples bad (especially the related to the pandemic response, as the main actors were the States, so I redirected to those obscure concepts mentioned in the answer) Explain or what do you mean by “merging Tech: Polkadot’s parachain governance, and China’s "social credit" rebuilt as opt-in competency trust networks”? Also, explain what do you mean by “Participation as renewable energy—generating legitimacy rather than depleting it”?
DS: What you’re sketching here is a radical reimagining of governance architecture—one where legitimacy no longer depends on fixed, territorial representation but emerges dynamically from reputation, expertise, and continuous participation. Polkadot’s parachain model provides the technical backbone, allowing issue-specific chains to govern distinct domains like climate, housing, or healthcare, while maintaining interoperability through a central relay chain. In this design, sovereignty becomes issue-based rather than geographic: citizens delegate their voting weight to trusted experts or communities on a per-issue basis, with the flexibility to recall their delegation at any time. This liquid structure not only decentralizes authority but also ties decision-making directly to knowledge and competence.
Layered onto this is a reboot of the much-debated social credit idea, not as state surveillance but as opt-in, competency-based trust networks. Here, reputation tokens—earned through peer-verified contributions or civic action—translate into governance power within relevant chains. Coupled with renewable participation mechanisms, such as dividends for civic contributions, staking for policy alignment, and yields from expert delegation, participation itself becomes self-reinforcing rather than draining. A synthetic prototype like the proposed “Civic Power Grid” in Shenzhen illustrates the potential: residents earn trust points through service or education, channel those into housing or green tech debates, and see their input cascade from local policy to global frameworks like the UN’s SDGs. In this model, legitimacy flows not from episodic elections but from continuous civic energy, creating a governance system where participation recharges itself and citizens everywhere—whether in Shenzhen or a Nigerian slum—can shape global outcomes through competence and contribution.
Me: But in that path or prospective scenarios, who would enforce them? where is the rule of law and use of violence situated? and who will use it in case of deviations or corrections? and in general terms, what would be the role of state actors?
DS: The challenge here is to strike a balance between utopian projections and hard-nosed realism. Any credible vision of post-state governance has to acknowledge that enforcement cannot be wished away. What changes is not the need for enforcement, but its form. In decentralized systems, enforcement mechanisms would likely evolve in parallel with decision-making, becoming just as distributed. States would not vanish but transition into “first among equals” within broader enforcement networks—still holding territorial capacity for coercion but increasingly embedded in systems where legitimacy derives from collective, issue-based authority rather than monopoly power.
Crucially, violence would remain as a last-resort tool, but its authorization could be radically democratized. Instead of enforcement being monopolized by elites or central authorities, mechanisms like liquid democracy could distribute the power to decide when coercion is justified. At the same time, reputation systems and incentive structures might reduce the need for direct enforcement altogether, creating built-in compliance through trust networks, transparency, and mutual benefit. In this framing, enforcement is not eliminated but transformed: from vertical command to distributed legitimacy, from coercion-first to compliance-by-design. This reframes the state not as obsolete, but as one actor among many in an evolving ecosystem of governance.
Me: What means states transitioning from monopoly players to "first among equals" in enforcement networks?
DS: The idea of the state as primus inter pares—“first among equals”—marks a profound reconfiguration of sovereignty. Rather than holding a monopoly over the legitimate use of force, the state becomes a privileged node in a broader enforcement network, exercising specialized authority but no longer dominating the entire field. Its legitimacy flows less from territorial fiat and more from its ability to coordinate horizontally with non-state actors and subject-matter jurisdictions such as climate governance or digital regulation. This reframing shifts law from being defined exclusively by borders to being defined by function, and enforcement from relying solely on police and militaries to being orchestrated through protocols and consensus mechanisms.
In practice, this would mean states retain unique assets—such as logistical capacity or large-scale military force—but they must “bid” for enforcement mandates within issue-based networks. Their legitimacy is conditional: authorization derives from algorithmic consensus that blends local, global, and stakeholder votes, rather than constitutional monopoly. Accountability is built into interdependence: reputation scores, delivery of verifiable public goods, and transparency become the basis for influence.
Me: I still see problems in simple things such, how to define the issue niches and chains for gaining voting tokens? Most of time, issuer are dynamic and overlap, also they emerge and fade out, is not only attached to materiality (in the cases such as commodities I see more tangible but in others, no). Also the problem of polarization and polity fragmentation could continue, voters can follow the charismatic leader or key figures (as in the case of far right voters) and block or sabotage important issues in other chains or niches. What do you think? The problem of participation cannot be solved by new governance settings alone and by technologies. The problem of participation also will not be reversed only by more participation, it requires also quality in the participation.
DS: Server busy, please try again later. (Most of time the server was busy and I waited too long. As I needed to continue my trip, the physical one, so this was the end of our hallucinations in the warm summer of Beijing. But I will continue researching those topics again one day...).
Cultural aspects and Conversations with Real People
Going and coming back from the Great Wall, some hours away from the capital, I booked a tour where I met Aria, a Chinese woman who managed the trip. When I was entering in the historical complex I realized I lost my passport (you need your passport for everything in China, especially to enter into the cultural places) as it wasn’t in my bag. I got crazy scared and a movie passed in my mind in which I stayed more days there to ask a new emergency passport with the Brazilian embassy and local authorities, something that is problematic, bureaucratic and would have required to change my trip plans (after Beijing I was planning to visit Macau, Hong Kong, South Korea, and Japan).
Lucky me, Aria had the idea to search in the bus we took that was parked around the area. There I found it, but every minute was like an hour of anxiety. More than 40 countries and never lost my passport, I said. She replied “maybe China wanted you to stay haha”. After the tour she gave me a second personalized minitour in the Olympic city, and we were talking about many things. I learned she was from an ethnic minority, from inner Mongolia, but she considered herself connected to Mongolia, the steppes, the great skies, and vast empty lands. She told me that in her minority there is no one-single son/daughter policy that in turn is applied to the majority Han population. So, she has four brothers, something that is rare in her generation as all her friends are the only descendants in their families. She told me that there is some pressure to have kids on women, especially in her minority brunch but she has no clear ideas about it. I said is normal to doubt, there is no intrinsic maternity instinct in humans, as a recent study showed that about one third of women doesn’t feel love or connected to their first child after they are born (you can check this scientific study here). And that in most cases maternity, if chosen, is like a skill that people learn and nobody is prepared from advance. After all, that is a personal choice. Some days later, in Hong Kong, I touched the same topic with a European tourist who was in her 30s and was also doubting about having kids. She had a good job, although somehow she was burnout, and she had a stable and good partner. She was at the crossroads of that decision since they bought a house, but she was afraid of losing her freedom and miss many opportunities if she had a kid later on. Though decision, especially for women and the biological time window. Yet, regardless the decision, I tried to answer there is always something a person will miss, like a FOMO sensation. But then the difference between will and volition should arise to give some meaning to the path we choose. Will is the courage to make (or not) a decision, the potential energy to choose a path. And in many cases is hard. But when the decision has been made, you go fully for achieving that decision in practice, creating actions in that path. That is volition, the capacity to connect your decision with actions and practices to fulfill or complete that path you have chosen, even knowing the burdens, consequences, and things you are going to lose. In other words, it connect goals with means. (Never take a vital decision if you don’t have a clue or idea about the means, but is key to understand that you will never have a complete idea of them either).
Another Chinese person I talked for a while was David. He adopted a Western name as he worked as English teacher in an international academy, having travelled to the USA, Australia and other countries. He liked to meet foreigners to practice English and to show them his work. He really liked his job. I met him when I was resting in a mirador in a park, over a hill after walking many hours in the Forbidden City the first days. He was a very open Chinese guy, friendly and easy going. At the beginning I didn’t trust such cordiality, as in a trip in Turkey a long ago somebody scammed me with the same tactic. We talked for long, as he asked me what I knew about China, what I think about the people there, the culture, and so on. I asked the same questions I asked to the AI DeepSeek at the beginning of this post. He gave me similar answers, but he also mentioned that Confucianism and the public education by the State play a key role in shaping Chinese mentality and cultural behaviour. For example, the respect to communitarian values, the worship of tradition and ancestors, as well as the fact that Beijing is a big city and hard working place give the initial perception of emotional distance sometimes to foreigners. Modernity could change that he said. But I said that I saw a couple having dinner at a restaurant, and instead of talking, each one was with their phones and headphones watching and listening to different things. They were in the same table but at the same time they were not there. I told that modernity is also that, it can produce some distancing and alienation towards our surrounding and the others. You can see that in every country of the world nowadays, especially in public transportation or when people are bored. I don’t want to sound like a boomer criticising the younger generations using technology, but sometimes, because of sociological dimensions, modernity does not mean more connection, as I wrote in this article some years ago (see link). And maybe, because of this necessity of connection, of showing yourself and your work, David confessed to me that he had a GoPro hidden camera that was recording all our conversation. He told me he first talk and then he told to people he did that, to avoid people get constrained in their talking or to talk in a more natural way. He told me those materials go to his website in order to show the conversation to his students. And in fact is was true, he showed me other materials from previous tourists. He asked me permission to use my material and upload our talk. I denied. I said that first you need to ask for consent and then have the interview, even if that affects the fluidity or naturality of the conversation. Is the more ethical thing to do, and as a researcher, I even need to ask written permission to make interviews, so there are some rules, even if there could be cultural difference. As a matter of fact, I don’t believe we can put every misunderstanding in the label “cultural difference”. I am sick of those words. Also, I said I didn’t know if he could be an undercover security agent or police officer faking that, monitoring political content or just having fun. Anyway, after I checked him deleting the data in his camera we stopped our time together. Anyway, David told me that people in Beijing are more distant because is a hard working city, and people work hard in the big metropolis, especially when they come from other provinces or rural areas. Cold modernity again. Yet, I need to say that I contrasted this vision a week later with an America linguist and sinologist who lived in Beijing but I met in Hong Kong. This person told me that, if you become part of the Chinese culture, having immersion especially learning their language, Beijing people have inner jokes that other Chinese people don’t understand. It is like they mock among themselves, as there is like a Beijing kind of humour, very particular but spread out when you live there. Whereas, if someone would expect that Hong Kong people would be warmer, funnier or more open due to the international influence and contact with other countries, or due to the warmer weather and climate, well...think twice. She told me that Hong Kong people are more distant and cold compared to those from Beijing. The reason, according to her, was that Hong Kong was more used to have internationals, but especially because is a very commercial and trading place. So, relationships are more ephemeral, transactional, and utilitarian many times. This market logic for sporadic relations are reflected in the lack of humour that is present in other cities like Beijing. A similar experience I have, for example, sometimes living in the Netherlands, even when people are polite and nice at the beginning, relations could be transactional. Anyway, I am digressing, and I can write hundreds of lines about my days in Hong Kong (If I don’t, just want to mention that I stayed in a dystopian building in the city center, due to the housing crisis finding a space even for accommodation is like a nightmare, but the landscapes, skyline, and nature, forests, islands, and mountains are magnifique) or about my life in the Low Lands of Europe, but let me go back to Beijing and its people.
I had other quick interactions with locals there, but one of the most iconic was probably at the last hours of my trip in Beijing. I needed to catch a flight at 2 a.m. at night, so I still had some time to go to a massage session at night together with a friend I made during the day tour to the religious temples in the city (such as Heaven Temple, Lama Temple, and Summer Palace). After we had dinner together and said goodbye, I left my old fancy hotel around midnight, not knowing that the secondary airport in the south was far and the road was blocked in some areas. Thus, and since it was very late and a long and quiet ride was ahead, my taxi driver, a bald thin calm middle age man that resembled a Buddhist monk and I had a good talk mediated through these apps that translate and transcribe the conversations. Firstly, he asked me, with respect, that in China is not common to see people like me and he wondered if I was a mixed person (racially speaking). I answered yes, and I told that where I come from, is very common to be mixed and have different ancestors. I realized that despite being a metropolis, Beijing might be a bit closed or distant from foreigners and other ethnicities compared to other big capitals in the world. We also talked about many things including football. Of course he knew a lot about Brazilian football players and clubs (although is not my favourite topic since 2011, when my team won everything and I quit being a fan since then), about geography, weather, and life and some politics. I avoided direct questions, but I asked what where the two things he was proud about China, and the two things he considered the negative or hard parts of his country. I don’t remember the positive ones, but to the negative ones he replied that, despite being a socialist country, the government does not take care about the salaries of the average people. Compared to other countries, the Chinese salaries are lower and the cost of living is getting higher and higher, especially the price of houses. I said that inflation and housing crisis are also international problems, but I understood that these are sensitive topics, especially in a country that should care more about social problems. We also had small talks about other topics but what I liked on him was his smile and low voice. He transmitted calm and demonstrated a sense of curiosity, with respect on the manners and in the questions, that I really liked. I realized that he and other people read a lot or receive a lot of information about the West and other countries. He knew about Trump, fascism, history, markets, sports, etc. Like a street journalist from the mundane life, he demonstrated that he know more about us and the West than vice versa. We only receive a fragmented image from the East, and especially from China, as it is a closed country for us, which complicates our understanding and the complexities of such a giant culture and people. But at the end I really enjoyed that quite and long ride in the deep night. I realized how Beijing was a monster, seeing blocks of buildings and lights for dozens of kilometres moving along the highway. At some point we were just quiet and enjoyed our shared silence, and this was key especially in the moment when a car in front of us had a little accident, losing one of the metal pieces that protects the wheel, and starting to scratch against the asphalt. A dangerous situation if the highway was not empty at that precise moment and thanks to the calm and quick reaction of my driver.
Overall, with those interactions and readings, I still believe how we are ignorant about the East (and I generalize now because Chinese culture influenced a lot other Asian countries), and how language is important not only to communicate but to create reality and world(s). I realized that most of the cliches and assumptions we project, for example, over China about being a closed dictatorship, are elements that local people they know very well. They are not ignorant or just manipulated, rather they are aware about those political and state dimensions. But at the same time they are aware about the West, and the rest of the world. They are connected, even using VPNs or other illegal methods to circumnavigate the Great Firewall. There is a huge contrast between the cities, and between different generations. Nationalist elements and CCTVs are present everywhere, and you can see this country is indeed becoming a hegemonic power in many fields. I am still intrigued by the contradictions, as presented in the questions I made to DeepSeek, but also captivated by the conversations, smiles, gazes, estrangement, and even by the gaps in communication-mutual-perceptions I had with real people (If you didn’t watch the film Lost in Translation, that btw is portrayed in a very different country of the East, Japan, please do it). And I didn’t have time to comment, but I am carrying a huge blueprint from the historical places, ruins, temples, and the misty clouds from the great wall mountains; still feeling the scorching sun and humid weather from the summer in my skin. Indeed, this heat came with me in the further steps of that journey to Hong Kong, Macau, South Korea, and Japan.
As a final reflection, I would like to rewrite some lines I thought when I was visiting the Ethnographic Museum of Seoul in South Korea (again a different country but with a shared influence), in the gallery about daily life passages over the history of that country:
Korean (and Eastern) life passages, lines of memory of mine. Acculturation* and culture contact? I found more commonalities than differences. Reversal of an ethnography of the east**.
* Acculturation refers to the process of the loss of one culture to another, which can occur gradually. It is said, for example, that during the Meiji Restoration, when Japan opened up to the world at the end of the 19th century under military threat, it underwent a process of brutal acculturation and Westernization.
** If in the past ethnographers wanted to make a cartography of other cultures (see Edward Said and his Orientalism or Levi Strauss works in the Amazon), like objects to be depicted by the Western gaze, or see the impassivity and simplification of the East by thinkers like Marx (in the Asian economy) and Hanna Arendt (the East has always been the same ‘social immobility’). Thus, I wanted the reversal. I want to be filled by the enormous dust and shadows casted by thousand of years under the scorching sun in the antipodes of my mind. A sunrise that contest the sunset but that delivers the sky to the other in order to become the protagonist of the day whereas the other sleeps in a endless cycle till the end of the world. I want to be immersed and explore the inaccessibility to something we already share but we still don’t understand. And we need this to construct a new sense of global history and humanity, especially in the next decades and perhaps centuries, as our problems become more interconnected, but also our lights. And I hope that, in the future, when Asian cultures would be again in the epitome of the daylight, they don’t look to us with the same gaze that emulates our anthropologist predecessors.
Practical Curiosities of the Country
There is a portrait of Mao Tse Tung in every bill oy Yuan, the Chinese currency. There is not other personality or topic in the different values, only the old Mao in different colours. People use apps to translate conversations and to pay in local currency like WeChat and Alipay, many tourist download in advance before traveling. I didn’t because it asked to scan and send your passport to the platform owners, something I found intrusive, and because my phone is quite old and didn’t have memory. So I travelled without internet in the street (except wifi) and with cash. You can survive in China like this, but be sure to have printed bilingual maps, screenshots or the main information in advance. Taxi rides are quite cheap in Beijing, and in the big Chinese cities I would say. They are very affordable in general. The country is very safe and the sensation of security sometimes is overwhelming, especially if you find checkpoints and military/security personnel in the streets, especially close to touristic places. Beijing has a sort of brutalist and modern architecture with colossal avenues and buildings. So if you like this style, that is a place to go. There are security controls even to enter in the metro stations. They take this seriously. Sometimes, if you don’t have a translator app, taking pictures of the dishes in the menu and asking to the waiters is a helpful tip. They have good food, and a variety of desserts, also for a reasonable price. Book in advance the entrance to the main tourist attractions as there is massive tourism, especially domestic tourism with many Chinese visiting other cities in their country. In summer, buy an umbrella and use lots of sunscreen, and drink a lot. Is very hot and humid there. In winter, be prepared for the cold. Although religion is not present everywhere anymore, and I am not religious, I found interesting reading about Taoism (the art of the way or the path) and basic elements of Eastern philosophy. In the Buddhist temples, don’t take pictures everywhere and respect the locals praying. The roofs of ancient palaces and temples follow an ancient architectural style that doesn't use screws or metals, but is more resistant and can withstand the weight of curved beams and don't break. It's art made of wood. If you want to know the temple's rank or its importance in the local worldview, count the number of animals/gargoyles on its roof. Sometimes the smallest temple is the most sacred. Usually you will find lions and dragons for protection against bad spirits. For some reason, the west is the sacred direction, and all Buddhas point toward it (except for the Great Buddha erected by the Chinese government in Hong Kong on a nearby island; it points north toward Beijing). I tried to find out why this sacred direction by asking people, but they didn't give me an answer. Maybe it's because the west is where the sun goes at the end, and where spirits go after death, and because there's a veneration of ancestors... I don't know. Pagodas are multi-tiered towers, tall and beautiful buildings that have a distinctive character in Buddhism and in Taoist and Confucianist traditions (in many places, beliefs are mixed or there is a syncretism of elements). They are supposedly places where different beings, in their reincarnations, take on new forms as they pass from one spiritual world to another. They recall the transmutation of matter and beings in a continuous flow, central, for example, to the path of Tao or to the successions of samsara in Buddhism. I was pleased to see, for the first time, in a Buddhist Lama temple, inscriptions with Tibetan, Manchu, and Mongolian characters, in addition to Chinese. I'd like to visit the Himalayas or the vast northern steppes if possible someday (I was able to see them a little from above on the return flight, along with the Gobi Desert and the Aral and Caspian Seas, and from afar, the sacred Mount Ararat in Armenia, the one from the myth of the Flood and Noah's Ark). If I don't travel there, I've seen many mountains that have already brought me a great deal of tranquility proportional to their weight. Finally, in Japan, in temples with a Xintoist matrix, where a pan-spirituality is venerated in elements of nature or other seemingly inert elements, I'm still waiting to investigate further the importance of portals or porticos. I imagine it must be related to a liminality or a process of transition and change, like Mujo in Buddhism, impermanence and transience, but I could be wrong. On a rainy day, I watched raindrops bounce off those portals near Kyoto, in a forest filled with tourists. Nevertheless, those droplets transported me to a place deep within me, filled with a certain serenity. Finally, the wind or the blowing air also has a certain sacredness, being associated with matter and the transubstantiation of dead ancestors in time, coming to communicate and spread news. Even if you are not spiritual you can see living matter transformed into a natural element in motion. Its importance is such that even in Tibetan Buddhism, banners are raised and bells ring in the wind. It reminds me of the film Spirited Away, but also of the film Perfect Days, where a street cleaner notices and hears the wind rustling in the leaves of the trees, playing with the nuances of light. This act is called Komorebi in Japanese. It's the most mundane version, so to speak, but also charged with a certain sacredness, without necessarily resorting to institutions or dogmas of appreciating light and shadow. It reminds me of the lyrics to the True Detective theme song. Part of the song, when a character dies, says: Mountain cats will come to drag away your bones. And rise with me forever, across the silent sand. And the stars will be your eyes, and the wind will be my hands. In a way, it's true: the wind speaks, whispers, and, why not, it also has tact. I think is nice to learn some basic information before traveling. But the main process happens after coming back. Most importantly, when you return, stay connected, watch movies, read books, fiction and news, and familiarize yourself more about the antipodes of our mind and the world.
Comments