No, I was wondering if I was arguing into expertise (relatively speaking). Like maybe you had spent a semester studying abroad there, which wouldn't make you an expert but would be something more than speculation. If you can read Mandarin, that would be relevant for me to know.
To the extent I was "questioning" you, it was what I saw as something of a contrast between the confidence you displayed in your opinions and the basis for those opinions. Not a gross contrast. Not worth mentioning except now that it's come up.
My use of the word prop was inexact. The point was that the "sense of national purpose" that might take hold here will be based on our traditions; it will be constructed according to our social habits, expectations and geography; and that looking to China doesn't really add much because China is very different and also not very popular in the US
Thanks for clarifying your intent. That said, I still think the way the question was framed — “what’s your expertise?” — suggested a kind of credential check that you didn’t apply to your own anecdotal sources. I hadn’t claimed expertise, but I also hadn’t overstated my view. Like you, I was drawing on what I’ve read, observed, and thought through. It’s fair to scrutinize that, but it should cut both ways.
On the China example, I’m not arguing we should copy their system or that it translates directly to us. My point is that they’ve managed to construct a narrative, about resurgence, national dignity, and global standing, that clearly resonates with parts of their population. That kind of civic story, even if it’s state managed, can still have real emotional power. That contrast highlights how little emotional resonance exists in our own national story right now.
It’s worth remembering that much of what China is doing today (coordinated industrial policy, long-term planning, nation-building projects, and civic rituals that cultivate unity) mirrors what the United States did during the New Deal and immediately after World War II. In many ways, they learned from our example. The irony is that they’re still applying lessons we’ve since abandoned.
You mentioned the confidence I show in my opinions. That comes not from pretending to have niche expertise, but from a belief in something more basic: shared human experience.
Human beings everywhere respond to narratives that provide a sense of belonging, purpose, and continuity. That’s not unique to China or the United States; it’s a basic part of political and emotional life. You don’t need to be a specialist to recognize that state-led projects and national myth-making often succeed not just through coercion or control but because they tap into widely felt desires for meaning and pride. It’s the same reason the New Deal era in the U.S. produced such enduring emotional attachment, not just because of the policies, but because of the story those policies told about who we were and where we were going. This is how people experience politics.
What interests me is how we recover that here. Looking to others isn’t about mimicry, it’s about remembering we once led the way.
www.nature.com
