Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

I got a couple of interesting responses to my post yesterday suggesting that China is not a big threat. First this from reader DT, who objects to thinking of China as a single country with a fairly low per-capita GDP:

The issue here is that China is essentially two separate countries: (1) a bunch of really rich cities (population 200M+), and (2) an extremely poor rest of the country. Think of it as Mexico and the US under a single government. Unlike a normal country, authoritarianism and the hukou system keep the two more or less separate.

Per-capita GDP figures completely miss this reality. And it is important because China could become a serious competitor to the US if it had a very rich part of 300M (about the same size as we are) and a dirt-poor remainder of 1 billion people….You might think “oh, well those billion poor people are going to be a drag on the system.” But the bizarre reality of contemporary China is that they might not be. Who knows, the system might sustain itself indefinitely.

And this from reader RC:

I agree with what you said in your piece today, but I think you miss the key point. Yes, the US economy has a dominant lead over China’s, and Chinese internal policy is somewhat self-limiting. But the fight with Huawei (and others) isn’t about that at all. It’s broadly accepted that they are hard-coding access in their telecom equipment and burying various hidden functions in their silicon. The use of this hardware opens up a door to cyber espionage and sabotage that is orders of magnitude worse than the alternatives.

They’re still going to place these chips and switches in Western nations, but to the extent that we can keep that kind of compromised gear out of our networks we probably should.

I don’t know enough about China to have a considered opinion about these points, but I’ll toss out a couple of comments. On the GDP issue, this strikes me as a bit like saying the US is a country of 50 million with a per-capita GDP of $100,000, plus a bunch of poor people no one cares about. But you can say this about every country. Is it legit to make this comparison? Or is it legit only for China because their rich bit is so big in absolute terms?

As for Huawei, I agree that it’s “broadly accepted” that their equipment is compromised. But is it true? It’s not that I’d be surprised or anything, but I guess I’m a little more skeptical of accepting stuff like this on faith than I used to be.

WE'LL BE BLUNT:

We need to start raising significantly more in donations from our online community of readers, especially from those who read Mother Jones regularly but have never decided to pitch in because you figured others always will. We also need long-time and new donors, everyone, to keep showing up for us.

In "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," we explain, as matter-of-factly as we can, what exactly our finances look like, how brutal it is to sustain quality journalism right now, what makes Mother Jones different than most of the news out there, and why support from readers is the only thing that keeps us going. Despite the challenges, we're optimistic we can increase the share of online readers who decide to donate—starting with hitting an ambitious $300,000 goal in just three weeks to make sure we can finish our fiscal year break-even in the coming months.

Please learn more about how Mother Jones works and our 47-year history of doing nonprofit journalism that you don't find elsewhere—and help us do it with a donation if you can. We've already cut expenses and hitting our online goal is critical right now.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

We need to start raising significantly more in donations from our online community of readers, especially from those who read Mother Jones regularly but have never decided to pitch in because you figured others always will. We also need long-time and new donors, everyone, to keep showing up for us.

In "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," we explain, as matter-of-factly as we can, what exactly our finances look like, how brutal it is to sustain quality journalism right now, what makes Mother Jones different than most of the news out there, and why support from readers is the only thing that keeps us going. Despite the challenges, we're optimistic we can increase the share of online readers who decide to donate—starting with hitting an ambitious $300,000 goal in just three weeks to make sure we can finish our fiscal year break-even in the coming months.

Please learn more about how Mother Jones works and our 47-year history of doing nonprofit journalism that you don't find elsewhere—and help us do it with a donation if you can. We've already cut expenses and hitting our online goal is critical right now.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate