This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers visit http://www.djreprints.com.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/bret-stephens-hong-kong-pops-the-china-bubble-1412636585

- 530
- 199
- Text Size
- Regular
- Medium
- Large
- Google+
- LinkedIn
- Print

Global View

# Hong Kong Pops the China Bubble

## The protesters know that what’s hailed in the West as ‘the China dream’ is a hoax.

ENLARGE
Protesters outside the central government offices in Hong Kong, Oct. 7. Brent Lewin/Bloomberg News
167 COMMENTS
By
Bret Stephens

Bret Stephens
The Wall Street Journal
CANCEL
- Biography Bret Stephens
- Bret.Stephens@wsj.com
- @StephensWSJ

Oct. 6, 2014 7:03 p.m. ET

Whatever comes next with the demonstrations in Hong Kong, they’ve already performed a historic service. To wit, they remind us of the silliness of the China infatuation so prevalent among pundits and intellectuals who don’t live in China.

That’s the central lesson of “Occupy Central With Love and Peace”—a movement that, morally speaking, is to its Wall Street namesake roughly what Václav Havel was to Abbie Hoffman. The student-led protests, which have demanded that Beijing honor its promises to allow democratic elections for Hong Kong’s chief executive, represent the ideal future of modern China: principled and well-educated, pragmatic and worldly. And what this potential Chinese future has been saying emphatically for the past week is that it wants no part of China’s dismal present.

That might come as news to the legion of China boosters who have been insisting for years that the 21st century belongs to the Middle Kingdom, and that the sooner we get used to it the better off we all will be. These are the people for whom a visit to Shanghai’s skyscraper-rich Pudong district, or a glance at official Chinese economic statistics, or a ride on one of China’s bullet trains, is enough to convince them that the West has had its day.

If only we could be “China for one day,” so that democratic partisanship didn’t stand in the way of enlightened governance— wouldn’t that solve everything?

Don’t tell that to the people of Hong Kong, who have learned the hard way that, except when pressured, Beijing honors no promises, countenances no dissent and contemplates no future in which the Communist Party’s grip on power can be loosened even slightly. Hong Kong became rich on the small government, laissez-faire, rule-of-law-not-men principles of its late colonial administrators. It has remained rich because, by comparison to mainland China, it remains relatively free and uncorrupt. Hong Kong is what China could be if it weren’t, well, China—if state intervention were minimal; if government weren’t a vehicle for self-enrichment; if people could worship, write, exercise and associate just as they please.

#### Opinion Journal Video

New York Post Editorial Page Editor Bill McGurn on the strength of pro-democracy protests and Financial Secretary John Tsang’s visit to the United States this week. Photo credit: Getty Images.

That’s what’s been at stake in the past week of mass protests: The people of Hong Kong have come out in force because they know what China is. Yes, they value their territory’s political autonomy, its traditions and idiosyncrasies. Yet they would not be lying in the streets, enduring thunderstorms and tear gas, if Beijing were offering them a better deal—better governance, bigger markets, greater wealth, wider possibility.

It’s not. There’s a reason why the elite of the Chinese mainland are often looking for the exits. The daughter of Supreme Leader Xi Jinping enrolled at Harvard under a pseudonym, as did the grandson of former leader Jiang Zemin . Other wealthy Chinese vie for jobs at U.S. investment banks, apartments on Manhattan’s 57th street, passports from Canada, green cards from the U.S. Chinese entrepreneurs account for three-quarters of the EB-5 U.S. visas—green cards for foreigners willing to put $1 million down.

“While the [Communist] party touts the economic success of the ‘Chinese model,’ many of its poster children are headed for the exits,” reported the Journal’s Jeremy Page in 2012. “They are in search of things money can’t buy in China: Cleaner air, safer food, better education for their children. Some also express concern about government corruption and the safety of their assets.”

These are the people for whom every conceivable door in China is already open. What about the nonelite? What about the people who don’t have a politically connected relative, or can’t afford to bribe a party official for a contract or a doctor for a medical procedure, or lack the funds to leave the country, or simply intend to pursue an honest calling in life, and do so honestly?

These are the people for whom the demonstrators in Hong Kong were also marching. “Don’t make us like the rest of China,” is an implicit theme of the movement. It comes from people who understand that what is hailed in the West as “the China dream” is a hoax. Dreaming is the essential freedom: There can be no true dreaming when the state regulates the sorts of dreams its people may have.

Where the real dream lies is in the minds of China’s cheerleaders in the West. These are people with the souls of technocrats. They look to Beijing now—as they did to Moscow in the 1960s—as a model of government in which wisdom comes from the top, national energies are put in the service of gigantic projects, and autocratic consensus replaces democratic fissiparousness. They seek life (and politics) without contradictions. Five or 10 years from now, when the China bubble has burst, they’ll be making a fetish of some other promising technocracy.

Meanwhile, pay attention to the people of Hong Kong. They have reminded us again that China is a dream only to credulous columnists, and that the lamp of the West still shines brightly in Asia.

Write to bstephens@wsj.com

- 530
- 199
- Text Size
- Regular
- Medium
- Large
- Google+
- LinkedIn
- Print

167 comments

- Get Livefyre
- FAQ

Sign in
+ Follow
Post comment
Link
Newest | Oldest
ROBERT CABRERA subscriber 5pts

I believe we flirted with those same notions back in the early thirties saying that Italy and Germany were the wave of the future.

Alexandre Dniestrowski subscriber 5pts

Bubbles are driven by hubris but ineluctably there is a moment where reality forces brings you down to earth.

Sam Pyeatte subscriber 5pts

China is going to have another revolution and they are heading for it, full speed. The youth are going to rip that country up for the betterment of everyone.

Alexandre Dniestrowski subscriber 5pts

Spot on: Remember Japan in the 80s? BRICS more recently?

It is amazing how these mirages are projected into people's minds: Thirst for absolute?

WEIZHONG WANG subscriber 5pts

Anyone here knows where this @GLENN DONOVAN comes from? Just today alone, this wise man posted 20 comments on 3 articles. Almost all ridiculed others opinion, with an attitude that he is the know it all. "Biden is a fool, a national embarrassment. But then again, so is Obama and so was Bush and so was Clinton.", "can you answer the questions I asked without using Google?", "please, show me that I'm wrong", "What rock did you crawl out from under?"...there is so much of these nonsense, there is not enough space. He did say "After having my investments wiped out twice now (2000 and 2008)", is this why he is so bitter? But, man, I thought he is a defender of free society, why would be hate the world for his own investment ignorance? scratching my head....

Justin Zhou subscriber 5pts

If this happened before 1997, will the author say it pops the UK Bubble? If this happens in Singapore, will the author say the bubble also bursted? Do not underestimate China, as it proved those pundits wrong for the past 3 decades. They could be wrong for another 3.

The students' request is righteous, but the method is wrong and timing is ill. It will not change HK much, but will introduce way more uncertainties and chaos with an anti-Beijing and potentially anti-China CE in power. When the students shouting "Go back to China" to those low-income new emigrants, you will know things can easily go wrong with this movement.

But who cares, many say HK is not part of China anyway. Moral high ground could not be wrong, just like in Iraq and Syria. Leave the Chinese alone, they will figure out things themselves. And they are smarter than you think.

Steve Haynes subscriber 5pts

Ah China - what liberals wish they can make America into. Unfortunately we have a president who is succeeding in reaching this goal. I believe Obama envys the Chinese leadership (and Russia's too) because they rule without a bothersome constitution as he is sometimes forced to do.

Venkat Gundapaneni subscriber 5pts

China was appealing to western technocrats & investment bankers only, due to the perceived huge market.

As for social values, intellectual capital, leadership, world vision and zillion other things, be it China, Russia, India or EU; no comparison with USA, period.

Lastly, the pathetic presidencies of Bush & Obama did immense harm to USA. If this becomes a trend rather than exception, USA's eminent position will definitely be in danger.

Zachary Narrett subscriber 5pts

If "the political leadership in China has the best interests of the people in mind," why not allow the people a free and fair vote?

Luca Febbraio subscriber 5pts

All true Bret ! I lived in China for 19 years and know exactly the reality of the China dream: it is a big hoax ! Unfortunately the China dream is also fueled by western media and multinationals in their desperate attempt to uncover sensational news (the former) or build value for their shareholders (the latter) .

sandy malik subscriber 5pts

great article Bret. Cant wait to see the Chinese facade fall apart. you say, next 5-10 years… you are spot on.

Terry Mcewen subscriber 5pts

My impression after traveling in China on business is that the people I meet are generally satisfied with the economy and life- of course these are typically well educated people with good jobs. The biggest issue China has to face is pollution, if they don't solve it they will have political unrest.

Generally I would say that the political leadership in China has the best interests of the people in mind, compared to someone like Putin who is only worried about himself, or several US politicians as well. Political corruption is not only a Chinese phenomena

An interesting question to ask a western person is if they would rather live in China (totalitarian) or India (democracy)

WEIZHONG WANG subscriber 5pts

It is quite remarkable that those who have never been to China, or have been there just a few times, are all for strong demonstration and interruption of social order in China. While those who literally LIVED in both China and US, who have seen Mao's dictatorship and the authoritarian rules after that, who were on Tian An Men square in 1989, and who have also lived in a free society in US for many years, are against Hong Kong style demonstration.

SAMUEL SWIDERSKI subscriber 5pts

Dumb article with typical western ignorance thinking their value should be applied everywhere in this world. This type of mentality is no different from the Muslin fundamentalists believing Islamic law should rule the world. Be a responsible journalist, ask yourself how much and how deep do you understand Chinese people, culture and history before you write an article for a reputable newspaper.

Mark Dragoslovich subscriber 5pts

Spot on sir.

Jeff Rothman subscriber 5pts

Good article, but old news. In an earlier comment, someone who seemed to know what he was talking about wrote that China spends far more on internal security than on national defense, as they want to spot 'troublemakers' early on.

I met a man who does documentaries on vanishing cultures. He goes to places that very few others would dare visit, crosses borders in countries like Pakistan and Myanmar where it is convenient (not at border crossings), etc. He was in Kashgar and told me this was the only place he visited where he felt his life was in danger due to Chinese internal police constantly monitoring him, etc.

I was hauled off the street in Shenyang in 1991 by internal security police, where the one who could scream (not speak) English yelled that I was a spy sent by the CIA, etc.

Most who had the means left Hong Kong before it was handed over to the Chinese. I visited two years later and others with whom I spoke all told me that they would have left if it was possible.

Edward Goldberg subscriber 5pts

@Wayne Barker&Russel Johnston

Definition of FISSIPAROUS: tending to break up into parts : divisive <fissiparoustendencies within a political party

David Erlandson subscriber 5pts

I lived in China in the early 80's and have not been able to return to see what happened there. The economic miracle must have take a toll on quality of life, even while there are enhancements. If liberty does not guide capitalism, indigenous corruption could ruin the benefits. Even back then, you had cadres having meat delivered to their back door in the middle of the night, while regular folks used grain tickets and ate pork bits and cabbage. Nice article, Bret, thanks.

LEON ZHAO subscriber profilePrivate 5pts

I am a firm believer in democracy and try to influence my friends, contacts in China through

social media of the superiority of western democratic system. But I found people are less interested and believed in democracy than they used to be thanks to the economic success of China on one hand and the paralyzing political governing in the West on the other. The Chinese intellectuals are wondering if they can afford a multi-party decision making system like US. We need to get our own house in order for people to see that democracy is still the right way for government. When we can't pass a budget or use a tax code even accounting professional can't figure out its meaning, it does not provide a good role model of democracy for the rest of the world to follow.

SAM KAZEE subscriber 5pts

amazing, thanks.

Wayne Barker subscriber 5pts

So Bret,

Looks like you are envious of archaic big words used in the Economist.

fissiparousness?--Give me a break

Hongyi Xin subscriber 5pts

I don't hate democracy and you are right about Mao. The risk of having an authoritorian government is having another crazy dictator. But that's all history. Yes it's dark but it has all passed. I would say China isn't Mao's China anymore and there won't be a Mao anymore. China has gone a long way since then.

You can't get to democracy in one leap. When you count those people died from famine on Mao, will you count the people died from warlords on Sun Yat-Son, the Chinese George Washington? If China installs democracy right now, I bet you, there will be another warlord era and another hundreds of millions deaths.

Even Taiwan is not really ready for democracy. Look at its history, its golden years was under the dictator Chiang Ching-kuo and Chiang Kai-shek. Her growth slipped ever since she entered democracy era. Besides, I don't really think Taiwan has true democracy. She has populism. Whoever that is unhappy about the current status can go ahead and occupy the congress and totally stall the country. Can you imagine that? Hundreds of people flood into the congress in Washington DC and occupy it, sleep in it, eat in it?

There are flaws, but ever since Deng Xiao Ping, I think the CCP has done an overall good work. It deserves some credit. China now has much more freedom then before and there will be more freedom in the future. Taiwan was still an authoritorian country not long ago. Given time, China will change cuz it's on the right track.

Harlin Smith subscriber 5pts

Lets hope the people of Hong Kong are successful at breaking the yoke of slavery that big government socialism imposes.

George Hollister subscriber 5pts

"Five or 10 years from now, when the China bubble has burst,"

Bret, five or 10 years? Even in the modern era, large central governments have had staying power, and when they crash it can be a surprise.

Gary McHam subscriber 5pts

@Steve Hutchinson - I did not know William Buckley personally, but I had the great pleasure of having Irving Kristol for a course at NYU's Graduate Business School (before its name change to Stern) entitled simply "Capitalism." I'm not sure he could have been a "talking head," because he made his points so clearly and succinctly that an opposing talking head would have been stumped on how to reply. Whether or not a columnist uses words to impress, the introduction of a word like "fissiparousness" runs the risk of breaking the reader's train of thought. Even if one knows the word (which I did not), the reader is likely to begin thinking about the word itself. Part of Irving Kristol's genius was his ability to communicate. Bret Stephens is good at this, too. I just thought this particular word was unnecessary. I do not remember the jazz composer who said this, but I have always liked it. "I pay as much attention to the notes to leave out as the ones to include."

Justin Zhou subscriber 5pts

@Alexandre Dniestrowski So who popped Japan Bubble?

Venkat Gundapaneni subscriber 5pts

@Terry Mcewen "An interesting question to ask a western person is if they would rather live in China (totalitarian) or India (democracy) "

you will sort of find the answer by looking at marriage statistics (caucasians marrying non-caucasians & the non-caucasians origin), pun intended :-)

Jay Campbell subscriber 5pts

Somehow the extensive Chinese history justifies deep corruption, imprisonment of dissidents and the murder of millions? Somehow democracy becomes evil? Freedom of speech and religion are can be suppressed because those are only western idea? Well, one of the great things about the US is the right to freedom of movement. Please excercise that right.

Nicolas Tavenner subscriber 5pts

@Jeff Rothman Been there, done that. Man handled by the police in Shenzhen for demanding better service and a parking spot.

Wayne Barker subscriber 5pts

@Edward Goldberg

I looked it up too. I like learning new words and actually have a large vocabulary--but I draw the line at tendentious and archaic words that have no particular use other than to show off your large vocabulary--especially when there are plenty of common words that would serve with better clarity.

Russell Johnston subscriber 5pts

@Wayne Barker Had to look it up, huh?

Michael Wood subscriber 5pts

@Hongyi Xin

"Given time, China will change cuz it's on the right track."

Change to what...a free-market, rule-of-law, religious and minority tolerant, respecter of the individuals' self-determination? These are not the values of the Chinese ruling elite and they are unlikely to promote creation of the institutions that make these values work.

So what is it that China is going to change into?

Nicolas Tavenner subscriber 5pts

@Harlin Smith Like (W) used to say (Not gonna happen).

Alexandre Dniestrowski subscriber 5pts

@Justin Zhou @Alexandre Dniestrowski

Bubbles are driven by hubris but ineluctably there is a moment where reality forces brings you down to earth. Japan in the 80s with all the communication noise around it was such a case.

Michael Wood subscriber 5pts

@Nicolas Tavenner @Jeff Rothman

And this is different from having your cash, car or house seized by police in the US as part of an Asset Forfeiture policy in the War on Drugs...how?

Wayne Barker subscriber 5pts

@Russell Johnston @Wayne Barker

Yes, I did. I thought the point of journalism was to be clear and not to obfuscate. I've ribbed Bret in the past about his big words but he still continues.

Hongyi Xin subscriber 5pts

@Michael Wood You sound like you personally know the ruling elites. Well, maybe you can read this for me then? http://news.qq.com/a/20140921/006325.htm (Let me translate the title for you: "President Xi called: democracy is not decoration and it's not just for display").

Ok. Let's assume what you said is right for a moment, that current ruling elites have no intention for "a free-market, rule-of-law, religious and minority tolerant, respecter of the individuals' self-determination". How do you know about future elites? You know them too? Most of them are probably educated in the US right now as we speak. You have no faith about your own country's education?

Rules of one generation might not change, but next generation will. Let me remind you, 150 years ago, the ruling elites of the US has no intention of freeing the black slaves. 90 years ago, the ruling elites of the US has no intention of letting women vote.

Michael Wood subscriber 5pts

@Hongyi Xin

A valid question. The examples you cite...slavery and non-universal suffrage...were inconsistent with the basic tenets of Western culture and therefore they could not endure as long as those values had legitimacy with the general population. Chinese Confucian culture does not have those same values.

My point was that if you...or the students in HK...think that Chinese culture is going to change so drastically as to adopt the Western values that underpin *democracy*...or that democracy can be achieved without those values...you are probably laboring under a mistaken assumption.

That is not to say the Chinese model will not be successful in bringing peace and prosperity to China. But to think it will come with democracy and popular participation in governing is ignoring the historical experience of autocratic top-down governments.

Steven Barnett subscriber 5pts

@Hongyi Xin

In the American system, there are no ruling elites.The government is a reflection of the people.I admit that for the moment that reflection is not very pretty, but in the end it’s the Constitutional system of laws, checks and balances that brought prosperity to the U.S.Expecting the next generation of ruling elite in China to fix things without upending the autocratic order is a pipe dream.

Hongyi Xin subscriber 5pts

@Michael Wood 50 years ago, the ruling elites of the US has no intention to let black kids go to the same school with white kids. 5 days ago, the ruling elites of the US has no intention to have gay marriage. But it all changes in time. You are holding China's current and claim it China's future. Don't you see it?

Hongyi Xin subscriber 5pts

@Michael Wood China needs its renaissance. Some of the modern Western values seems pretty good to me and is already adopted in China. You don't see people bowing everywhere, you don't see teacher beating students, you don't see women staying at home as housewives... there are so many differences already happening.

Hongyi Xin subscriber 5pts

@Michael Wood @Hongyi Xin That is a valid point. You might be right. Confucian culture won't praise democracy... But neither does middle-age Christianity. However, China today is not the Confucian China in late Qing dynasty, just like Hong Kong students are not Confucian pupils. If there is one thing Mao did good, that will be ditching the Confucian culture. I really believe Confucian culture is just a historical artifact. It was based on knowledge and social structures 2000 years ago. Even then, Confucian wasn't the dominating philosophy. There were Taoisms, Legalism, Mohist etc. It was really later on when the kings and the emperors who found out Confucian is the best psychological tool to rule peasants, was Confucian widely adopted.

Even then, Confucian was evolving, but still at certain point, it has become too obsolete that it needs a complete overhaul. That's why China hasn't been moving forward since Ming dynasty. It's just like how Europe stalled for the entire middle-age.

Hongyi Xin subscriber 5pts

@Steven Barnett @Hongyi Xin Yeah but that's because all American citizens respect the constitution and the national congress. It's also because America was lucky that President George Washington didn't become King George Washington.

China has a People Congress too but you all know it has been a puppet of the CCP. The problem is, no one in China thought it is really really wrong, at least not until recently.

After Xi took office, he returned some power back to the congress. Little but he did. Now you can hear dissent voice in the people congress. Small but there is.

Personally I don't think US system is the ideal system. Better than China but not the best. Candidates here are pre-screened too, by Wall street. If you speak against the financial sector, you will have no sponsorship and good bye your election campaign. US has elites. They are just not in the government.

While expecting the next generation is a pipe dream, revolution is definitely disaster.

James DiLorenzo subscriber 5pts

@Steven Barnett @Hongyi Xin Oh really , no ruling elites. Obama seems quite elitist to me. And Hillary is next. And Obama is doing his best to eliminate checks and balances

GEORGE CERNIGLIARO subscriber 5pts

@Hongyi Xin At least in a representative democracy, change can come about in a more or less open fashion, by a legislative process. (Not so during our Civil War and not now in the US, but that's Obama and the Dems for you, but that'll change). Yes, the US has had its protesters in the streets, but this is allowed by law. Is that true for China? As the CCP is, in fact, a party oligarchy, and ruled by the fiat of men, it might be difficult to effect these kinds of change in a way approaching civility. Yes, China will get there someday, but I hope the price in blood is not too great. The US lost ~650,000 lives during its Civil War. China might lose that in a week, if all-out Civil unrest breaks out. It's a very tenuous time for China right now, and calls for real leadership. Are they up to it?

Steven Barnett subscriber 5pts

@Hongyi Xin Sure - no system is ideal, that's why I want one the does as little as possilbe. As for Wall Street, I think you overestimate their influence, or we would not have Sentor Warren (not that I think Sen Warren is a good thing).

Hongyi Xin subscriber 5pts

@GEORGE CERNIGLIARO @Hongyi Xin If you know China's modern history. What you said have exactly happened many times. Sun Yat-Sen installed democracy through revolution and China almost instantly broke out into Warlord era and tens of millions lost their lives. Later he started another war to re-establish democracy and another tens of millions died. The outcome? He elevated Chiang Kai-Shek straight to the throne and Chiang turned out to be a hell lot of a dictator. Then it came Mao, who claim China needs to resume democracy and the dictator Chiang needs to return power to the national congress and then civil war broke out again. The outcome? Mao ate all his words and became the new dictator. Then it came Deng's struggle, Tiananmen protest.

Hongyi Xin subscriber 5pts

@Steven Barnett @Hongyi Xin Yeah it should be. I'm just really concerned how to get there.

Hongyi Xin subscriber 5pts

@GEORGE CERNIGLIARO Every single time when there is a revolution, millions lost lives and nothing change. We are so tired of revolutions. Comparing the bast dictators, this CCP (not Mao's CCP) is probably the most modest and it is gradually returning power back to people.

What you said is true. I'm not against it. China needs to institutionalize its power. But how? Through one more revolution? Please don't be...

GEORGE CERNIGLIARO subscriber 5pts

@Hongyi Xin @GEORGE CERNIGLIARO Couldn't agree with you more!

Show More Archives

#### Popular on WSJ

1. ###
   Secret of New Veggie Burgers: Plant Blood

2. ###
   Dallas Ebola Patient Dies

3. ###
   Opinion: Best of the Web Today: Questioning Panetta’s Patriotism

4. ###
   Wal-Mart Cuts Insurance for 30,000 Part-Timers

5. ###
   Spanish Ebola Patient’s Dog Is Put to Death

6. ###
   NASA Is Considering Deep Sleep for Human Mars Mission

#### Editors’ Picks

- #### The Middle Seat

  ###

  The TSA’s ‘PreCheck’ Conundrum

- #### Tricks of the Trade

  ###

  Take the Plunge With Patterns Without a Flop

- #### Ask Teri

  ###

  How to Wear the Latest Styles Without Constriction

- #### Politics and Policy

  ###

  Cuomo Lays Out His Liberal Credentials

- #### NY Culture

  ###

  New Director Envisions Bigger Role for Museo

- #### Jason Gay

  ###

  The Kid Behind the Wheel

- #### Arts & Entertainment

  ###

  Trying to Turn Back Time

- #### Careers

  PLAY

  ###

  What to do With Your Fixed Income Investments