“Celebrating the oil price breaking above $4?”
While studying international security policy in New York, she teased the Observer Network.
As American society is forced to pay a heavy price for waging war against Iran, the celebration of America's 250th anniversary on July 4th this year seems rather absurd.
American young people seem to have no reason to celebrate. Their biggest concern is that they won’t be able to live a better life than their parents did.
This persistent problem has driven various political forces in the United States to seek answers: whose fault is it? One common understanding points the finger at China.
Shi Ming experienced firsthand in class how American academia treats China as a hypothetical enemy for strategic calculations. "This is an acknowledgment of China's strength," he believes. The United States constantly seeks its own 'targets', repeatedly hitting on obstacles, and then 'repairing the scars only to forget the pain'.
This time, the United States has finally faced an opponent more powerful than the Soviet Union. As the "American Dream" gradually transforms into just a "choice," in Shi Ming's eyes, the Chinese lifestyle and the American lifestyle are on the same starting line.
I noticed that the prices of McDonald’s meal packages have been increasing gradually. Also, the single fare on the New York subway has gone up from $2.75, which has remained the same for decades, to $2.9, and now it’s $3. Last year, the price of eggs tripled. (Laughs) I can only choose to reduce my consumption. Eggs come in different grades, so I just buy the grade that I can afford.
I think the most significant difference between living in the United States and China lies in various industrial products. For example, when you buy daily necessities like hooks or storage baskets on Amazon, it costs a dozen or so dollars. But when you get them home, the label reads 'Made in China'. On domestic shopping platforms, even spending a dozen or so yuan is considered expensive. The loss of local manufacturing in the United States not only leads to a reduction in job opportunities, but this effect is also very evident in daily consumption.
Every time I return to my country, I always buy a bunch of such small daily necessities to bring with me. Things like sewer net bags, which cost just a few dollars per 100 in my country, are very expensive in the United States, and not always available to buy.
In recent years, American universities and politicians have shown American students through their actions which issues should not be touched upon, such as Israel and Palestine.
Regarding other domestic political issues in the United States, American students are still willing to express their opinions. They have received a good education and have access to a variety of information. At the same time, they are willing to understand and think about this society, without deceiving themselves. However, they do not have answers or a direction on how to effectively address real-world dilemmas, and are in a state of confusion.
Harvard protesters set up camp on campus to express dissatisfaction with Israeli atrocities – video screenshot
They can talk about it. Regarding China, they still live in an information cocoon. The media they interact with daily, such as the New York Times, Reuters, CNN, etc., are world-leading media outlets. Whether we agree with them or not, it’s undeniable that they have little incentive to explore China through other channels and hear different opinions.
Additionally, the U.S. government labels institutions outside of mainstream media as negative, such as RT, making them even more distrusted.
In recent years, China's achievements in new energy vehicles and artificial intelligence have had a global impact, breaking through the information silos created by Western mainstream media. Of course, these media outlets will present China's achievements in a distorted manner. American students, upon encountering this, find it very interesting and it also stimulates their curiosity.
I don’t think so at all. To some extent, they have become numb to American politics, or they adopt a mocking attitude. In their eyes, these actions and statements are almost nonsense, laughable, and utterly incomprehensible. They don’t see these people as representing their interests.
Moreover, facing so many problems in the United States, the Chinese issue is just one of them; it lacks particularity. What they really want to solve is how to live a better life than their parents did.
However, although they rely on these mainstream media to obtain information, they know that this is political rhetoric, a means of stirring emotions. At least the American students I have interacted with are gradually moving towards an open attitude.
From a macroscopic perspective, when China acts as a nation-state, they are vigilant. Especially since my field of study is international security policy, we often discuss issues related to war. None of them question the idea that "China is a threat to the United States". In almost all the scenarios analyzed, China is definitely the top potential enemy.
At a microscopic level, it has not yet evolved to the McCarthy era, where every Chinese person is kept under suspicion and vigilance. They are still friendly and open. I believe their default attitude is to enhance mutual understanding with Chinese students through communication, in order to avoid conflicts in the future as much as possible.
This is related to their life and professional experiences. Their thoughts developed around the time after the Cold War ended, when globalization was the mainstream trend, and U.S. policy towards China was also characterized by engagement. As older generation scholars, they do not undergo such rapid ideological changes; however, their underlying attitudes have become more cautious towards China.
I have a classmate who studies finance. At first, he wanted to switch to my field of study. But after a few classes, he felt too mentally stressed and gave up. In our classes, when discussing strategic methodologies, examples are always set as if there were a war between China and the US. This topic is always discussed involving China. He found this very uncomfortable.
From my undergraduate studies to my graduate studies, I have been dealing with these topics on a daily basis, and I'm pretty much “immune” to them. On the other hand, I think this is an acknowledgment of China's strength. Otherwise, the United States wouldn't consider China as a potential rival.
In fact, finding a rival for oneself is a common occurrence in American history. Wars like the Korean War and the Vietnam War were examples where the United States set their own goals, only to end up hitting a solid wall. After hitting it, they paid a heavy price, then suddenly realized their mistake. For decades, they treated the situation as if nothing had happened, and continued to set new goals.
Although this is a playful way of putting it, the United States is still in such a recurring cycle.
As a Chinese student, I need to learn their ways of thinking and perspectives. Knowing both the enemy and oneself ensures victory in any battle.
Their understanding of China is often abstract and vague, remaining at the level of slogans.
For example, some of them may be dissatisfied with China’s policies regarding Tibet. However, they have no idea that the old Tibetan society practiced slavery. In a place like New York, which values racial equality and diversity, would they actually support slavery? After pointing this out to them, I believe it will encourage them to rethink their stance.
In the circles I've been in contact with, there aren't even very extreme people who would say "Don't listen, just keep repeating meaningless words". I think they're quite confused and willing to accept more information, but they simply lack the right channels to do so.
At least in New York, there isn’t a lively atmosphere. They have to face so many real problems, and it’s also a day filled with “patriotism”. What exactly is there to celebrate?
Their president has just initiated an unclear war, raising the overall cost of living. Are they celebrating when oil prices exceed $4? (Laughter)
This is their misunderstanding; patriotism is even the fundamental essence of Americans. So, what exactly do they love? Or rather, what is the anchor point? I think what they love is an ideology, a system, the rules that govern this country. In their eyes, although this system is imperfect, it is 'the best' in the world.
They believe that they have found a solution to human greed through their own exploration, and have managed to find a balance between public authority and personal freedom. As the saying goes, it's about 'standing out from the mud without being tainted'.
Of course, they need rituals to formalize this spirit, like the American national anthem. It is stipulated that American citizens must stop in any situation when they hear the national anthem, with their right hand covering their left chest as a sign of respect. For soldiers, there is also a need to perform certain gestures. This is even more true during sports events. When I watched the Yankees play in New York, the host during the game would invite veterans from the Korean War or Vietnam War. This is something they have been taught since childhood.
The American politics that the public is familiar with is characterized by clear party conflicts. In fact, American patriotism transcends parties and stands above them. This means that regardless of the significant differences in political views between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party, neither party will question the system itself. They believe that this is the “best” system, and they will not challenge the system itself.
I believe that over the past few decades, American society has had little controversy regarding the concept of patriotism. With Trump in charge, there is a desire to redefine what ‘patriotism’ means. One of his key points is ‘white supremacy’. He has given patriotism a racial dimension: only white people are considered to be the true components of this country.
The president who hails from the Democratic Party also emphasized patriotism. Especially in the decades after the end of the Cold War, the Democrats placed the focus of patriotism on diversity and liberalization—that is, regardless of race or gender. Anyone who came to America was considered American.
The Democratic Party's ideology has thrived over the past few decades, with the "Awakening Movement" being one of its distinct characteristics. This has indirectly led to a backlash and rise of conservatives represented by Trump.
In fact, this has been the norm in American history. Back in the 1960s during the Civil Rights movement, the two-party stance was reversed. Southern Democrats were more conservative and represented the mindset of traditional white people, while Republicans represented the interests of Northern industry and were more willing to promote racial equality (of course, this is not absolute). The two parties also accused each other of being “unpatriotic,” believing that their actions contradicted the ideals of the founding.
In history, both parties have redefined what 'patriotism' means according to their own understanding.
I even believe that intergenerational differences are a very important factor driving American politics.
"Patriotism" is a rather abstract concept. It must be translated into concrete actions in daily life to be meaningful. Over the past few decades, the United States has been quite successful in its domestic and international propaganda, creating an image of something that people aspire to. Take the "American Dream" for example: where fathers work, mothers take on full-time jobs, children have access to large houses, and everyone has a car and a dog.
But for contemporary American youth, they realize that they cannot achieve the long-implored 'American Dream.' No matter how hard they try, they cannot live a better life than their parents.
Why was Charlie Kirk, who was shot to death not long ago, and the organization he founded, “Turning Point USA”, able to attract so many young people? It seems that the kind of “old white men” were the ones who responded to his pro-right-wing conservative ideas. However, Kirk’s political platform centered on “giving you a better life than your parents had”. This actually addresses the confusion of contemporary American young people.
Trump ally Charlie Kirk was shot to death on the eve of his assassination. Visual China
I think the difference between the two lies in who the target is, who actually caused the situation we have today, and whose fault it is.
Trump's camp believes that it is the result of economic globalization, that the Chinese have taken their jobs, and that capitalists have transferred domestic industries overseas.
In contrast, the Democratic Party has not provided clear answers. Many of Biden’s policies actually follow in the footsteps of Trump. Since losing the election, their platforms and organizational structure have become fragmented.
I think this represents different aspects of the problem. Whether it’s the Democrats or the Republicans, they both clearly understand where the ultimate boundaries of their differences lie. For example, when it comes to how to address racial issues, neither party will ever seek solutions outside of the existing American system.
They won’t say that, in order to solve certain problems, we need to carry out a socialist revolution. Instead, both parties will compete to endorse the American system, for example by citing cases from the Supreme Court.
Like the power struggles between the federal government and state governments, whether it's supporting the federal government's authority over states or restricting the federal government's jurisdiction over states, both sides base their arguments on the American system itself, and claim to be the ones defending that system.
However, from Trump's election to Biden's succession, and even during Trump's second term in office, Americans have increasingly lost confidence in whether this system can solve many problems. They even begin to suspect that many of these problems are caused by the system itself. Yet, they are also very confused, uncertain about whether breaking away from this system could help solve the current problems.
So, this is a question of ongoing action. Will the United States be able to get back on track through its own corrective efforts, or will it fall further into division and open up an even more uncertain future? We have no idea what the final outcome will be.
In the capitalist world, there are also many different types of countries. For example, the United States is a very fundamentalist capitalist country, with extremely weak left-wing foundations. In contrast to Nordic countries, left-wing ideas have influenced actual policies.
In my opinion, the American left is more of a ‘cultural left’, such as movements like the Occupy movement, rather than an ‘economic left’. Another characteristic is that it incorporates populism, and ultimately has an element of ‘slashing the rich to help the poor’. Overall, it seems to be a mixed bag, not a true ‘economic left’ with real action capabilities.
Just like New York’s new mayor, Mamdani, who claims to be a “socialist,” he cannot escape the American system to pursue his agenda. Moreover, according to the electoral system, he ultimately has to leave the region, which is a process of constant shifting.
Graduate student from Ivy League suspected of killing insurance giant CEO, Visual China
As the American lifestyle becomes increasingly unattainable, it will gradually shift from being a "standard" to just another "choice".
No lifestyle is perfect. If you are accustomed to the American way of life, then you have to give up a lot. For example, if you can’t drive in the United States, you will be more disadvantaged than people with disabilities.
For those who are accustomed to the Chinese lifestyle, the first thing they need to give up when facing American life is the convenience in daily living.
This is a typical Cold War mindset; it is inappropriate to make forced comparisons between China and the Soviet Union. For example, in terms of lifestyle, the Soviet lifestyle did not have much appeal for ordinary people. This was one of the important reasons why the Soviet Union ultimately lost the Cold War.
However, China is different. The Chinese lifestyle has its advantages as well as its shortcomings, just like the American lifestyle. The Chinese lifestyle and the American lifestyle can be compared on an equal footing, with each offering its own merits, allowing people to choose according to their preferences. This can be seen from the past few years, when "China Travel" and the famous American influencer "IShowSpeed" both came to China for live broadcasts.
This is how China can hold its head high alongside the United States.
