[natch]

China has cultivated in its people a very troubling mental complex centered on national pride and driven by the Century of Humiliation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Century_of_humiliation

To say they are fervent about righting the wrongs and perceived wrongs of the past is an understatement. It's pretty much a driving force of life with many people. It's a powerful dynamic. And it's one that's held close to the chest by Chinese students studying here in the US but in China it's freely talked about, written about, and taken for granted as the right thing.

On our (the west) side we also have racism and nationalism. But I think our more diverse (talking about points of view, not race here) and more activist anti-racism voices are a tempering force that China lacks.

Relating this to weaponization of AI, I think people like Stuart Russell are naive to think that watching Slaughterbots would give these students pause. On the contrary, it would excite them, because it's showing exactly the kind of thing they would be delighted to develop. Not that I know these students, but I'm aware how China drills bitterness into its people about their past humiliations, and uses this to develop racist nationalism. Pretty scary.

[dang]

> China has cultivated in its people a very troubling mental complex

> China drills bitterness into its people about their past humiliations, and uses this to develop racist nationalism

I don't believe you meant to, but you crossed into nationalistic and racial flamewar with this comment. Imagine how it must feel to read something like this if you're on the receiving end. It's surprising how many of the replies below managed to remain thoughtful. When I read those comments and compare them to yours, it's clear who the model HN users are in this case.

I don't think you were being malicious, I think you underestimated the difference between musing in a personal conversation and broadcasting to potentially millions of people. For example, it isn't enough to protest that you didn't mean all Chinese, just the ones who <insert caveat here>. That is far too crude to undo the impact such claims make on the ones who are being categorized. If you can imagine yourself in that position, this is not hard to see; yet it is hard to imagine, because we're mostly so certain that none of it could ever be justified in our own case, so it feels like no big deal.

[natch]

Point taken, thanks.

[jl6]

There must be actual Chinese people here on HN. Can any weigh in on the reality of this? It’s a heavy charge to make against an entire population.

[baobrain]

I've been through 3-8th grade education in Chengdu at a top 100 school. The rest of my education was in the US, so I may be biased in one way or the other.

From my perspective, I didn't really see it that way. Like any country, the history curriculum focuses on China's history, focusing primarily on ancient history (pre-Qing dynasty) for 3 semesters with one semester of modern Chinese history (Qing to present). While there certainly was a nationalistic tendency in many topics I would regard the information as historically accurate (as compared to courses about east Asian history here in the US). And in reality, my many friends in China with whom I've maintained contact over the years do not have this sort of mentality and are against censorship and much of the nationalistic messaging.

Another interesting note that people here have no knowledge of is professors in China are often times anti-CCP. Many professors take this to the extreme and in papers will often just give a bad grade if it mentions any good policy by the CCP.

On a semi-related note, the comments many make here on HN about China make me extremely uncomfortable. Not because they touch on sensitive topics but because they smear an entire population of people as liars, thieves, and mindless followers. Replace the word "China" and "Chinese" with "Italy" and "Italian" in many comments and they could have been written back in the Ellis Island days.

[dang]

They make me and the other HN moderators uncomfortable too. Unfortunately, I don't know what to do about it at scale. We will continue banning the worst and asking the rest not to do this. But it's a matter of mass trends meeting mass psychology. I feel like Canute commanding the waves to stop, knowing that it won't work.

When you notice examples of this, we'd appreciate it if you (or anyone) would email us at [e-mail] so we can at least post moderating comments in the thread. We can't come close to seeing all the comments, and sometimes I notice wretched stuff days later that it pains me to have missed at the time.

[natch]

I should have made it more clear it's not all people, it's many people. And the problem is not the people, it's the system of government control of education, media, and now digital media at every level. You have been exposed to more voices (metaphorical) so you are one of the lucky ones. It's good to hear you find some of these voices to be inside of China still. I imagine being inside the system before encountering more viewpoints (grades 3-8 in your case) it would hard to see anything wrong. It's like being in the matrix and not knowing you're in the matrix.

[whorleater]

This comment is so incredibly patronizing ("oh it's good to hear you're one of the good Chinese") that I'd be insulted if I wasn't laughing so much.

[natch]

>("oh it's good to hear you're one of the good Chinese")

Except that's not what I said or meant. Yet you felt the need to put it in quotes.

[echevil]

I am a Chinese citizen and all my education was in China, from kindergarten to grad school.

> China has cultivated in its people a very troubling mental complex centered on national pride and driven by the Century of Humiliation.

I’d say this is correct to a small extent — the history lessons in particular, took that stance when it’s covering contents about Chinese history from late Qing dynasty to the end of WW2. But the education also renders China as a peaceful nation, and the rise of China would benefit the entire world, which majority of the Chinese population agrees.

> To say they are fervent about righting the wrongs and perceived wrongs of the past is an understatement

It would be a correct statement if “righting the wrong” simply means “making China a great country again” so that “centuries of humiliation would never happen again”. Yes majority of Chinese citizens do have national pride, not unlike people any other country I’ve seen. Except maybe some extreme nationalists, most Chinese citizens would love to see China becoming stronger peacefully and be helpful to under-developed parts of the world.

> But I think our more diverse (talking about points of view, not race here) and more activist anti-racism voices are a tempering force that China lacks.

There are very little discussion about racism in China compared to US, simply because it’s less relevant. - Most Chinese don’t ever interact with a different race. But diversity in oppinions in other topics are very common. I’d say it’s virtually impossible to keep a billion citizens on the same page.

Just as an example, at the core of China’s “nationalism education” (don’t know what should I call it) is the anti-Japanese war which was part of WW2. Like South Korea, plenty of Chinese hate Japan for not acknowledging the war crimes they’ve done and trying to erase those facts from their history books. There had been several movement to boycott Japanese products in the past two decades. At the same time, Japanese culture actually have a huge influence in China, especially among young people. Japan is also one of the most popular foreign destinations Chinese people would love to travel to.

[JackFaker]

I'm curious to know if you can speak to how minority populations are discussed or addressed in a historical or modern context? I understand that there is something like 50+ recognized minority groups in China.

[echevil]

In a historical context, the minority groups are mostly people lived in different areas. Typically Han was in the central/east region in China, and there were other groups in north/west and sometimes south. There had been lots of wars in the past, and lots of peace as well. The fairly recent Qin dynasty was actually founded by a minority group in the northeast, and they ruled Han along with all other minority groups for hundreds of years. Most minority groups are heavily influenced by culture of Han, whether they controlled large part of China or not. For example, after Qin dynasty controlled the entire China, the emperors inherited plenty of traditions from Han; they started speaking Chinese and learning from classical Han literature; and they influenced Han culture as well. There are exceptions like Genghis Khan -> They occupied China but didn't care about local culture at all, and soon they left.

All the dynasties founded in the region, no matter if it was mostly Han people or minority groups, are considered part of China's history now. Just that Han had much higher weight in history books.

In a modern context, the main theme from textbooks is that all the minority groups live peacefully together and united as one nation, no matter what the history is. This is mostly true in reality, except maybe a small number of people in the west might want separation. You can find people from all minority groups living in large cities in the east of China, where the economy is most advanced. They mostly appear not much different from Han people, even though they might still carry some traditions from their own culture. Sometimes Han people might get curious when they meet someone from a minority group, but mostly they won't treat them any differently.

Being a part minority group is generally a good thing in China -> Among other things, they get bonus points in college entrance exams, which is a very big deal for vast majority of Chinese.

[JackFaker]

That is really interesting. Thank you.

[whorleater]

I'm Chinese and I can confirm that I am, in fact, a bloodthirsty monster fueled by vengeance as GP commented. In fact I am building a next-gen killbot in my basement as we speak. My education from the Chinese system has left me with no capability for individual thought and zero perspective of the outside world, and therefore all my fellow Chinese citizens are driven by stereotypical perceptions of Chinese culture, as Western internet commenters describe.

[yesenadam]

Thank you for this, one of the greatest comments I've read on HN. I have tears in my eyes. (Australia here)

[natch]

Just to be clear，and I'm not saying your missed this distinction, but in case anyone did, I'm not talking about Chinese the race (which technically can be argued as consisting of many races, btw). I'm talking about what the education and state controlled media does to China's citizens who grow up in China.

[nashashmi]

Being foreign born myself, I can see this pretty easily. When you have an external enemy outside of this country, the entire country will unite in that cause even in the endeavor to create very powerful weapons. (Think US affinity for nuclear proliferation during the cold war.) Few will pause to think that such weapons will be used against the best of our own people.

And that is the mentality difference between the US and China. US (having no real enemies) citizens see development of these weapons as potentially being used against its own citizens. Whereas Chinese citizens sees these weapons being to protect themselves from external threats.

[Leary]

lol exaggeration much? Psychoanalyzing other people, especially a whole country, without communicating with them is a sign of close-mindedness that I thought rational discourses on HN would preclude.

There are hundreds of thousands of Chinese students in the US whose view on nationalism differs from individual to individual. Not only is the characterization of a purported hidden motif not warranted, it is reminiscent of Yellow Peril.

Nationalism is certainly alive in China. But Chinese foreign policy is only assertive only in its immediate periphery. To think that they are harboring this deep seeded grudge against the West that would threaten our physical safety is ludicrous.

[natch]

>But Chinese foreign policy is only assertive only in its immediate periphery.

This is a good point which seems to hold for now, at least with regard to exertion of military force. It’s mostly defensive although there is disagreement about the boundaries of what is to be defended.

Longer term though there are concerning matters like the extension of predatory loans to African governments in exchange for mineral and other development rights. Ironically similar to some of the abuses China suffered in its past.

[yourbandsucks]

They're right, though.

If China were staying 'beneath' the west, like they're 'supposed to', we wouldn't have scare articles every week in the economist and the NYT, and we wouldn't have this comment at the top of the thread.

You're demonizing them as scary others and proving the point of hardliners there.

[ttls]

It is time to pay for the West because they don't care the human rights in China

[_b4ut]

The Chinese Government is suppressing free speech regarding Tibet, Taiwan, Uyghurs, corruption, forced displacement and plenty of other socially relevant topics. And just as it takes two to tango it takes two to suppress free speech. One party to suppress (in this case literally as there is just one) and another to effectively obey - that's the Chinese society pretty much in its entirety. That means Chinese society is effectively brought into line.

So from that perspective I don't understand why 'natch' is receiving so much protest here. Totalitarian regimes are as easy to predict as a linear function and the Chinese "government" is totalitarian. The goal is to maximize power by all means necessary and - to err on the side of caution - also all means available and obtainable.

Humanitarian concerns exclusively play a role in governments and societies where at least some level of democratic processes and transparency can be carried out.

The bottom line is - expect the worst.

[kwizzt]

It's not Chinese people aren't aware of what the Chinese government is/has been doing. This is why natch's comments have received so many negative feedbacks. natch doesn't give any evidences to support his arguments. Instead, he just bluntly said that 'Slaughterbots would excite them' as if he has seen it in person. This is an insult on the intelligence and moral standard of Chinese student or common man.

I know what the Chinese government has been doing and I was born and raised in China. However, that doesn't make me the immoral, senseless and vengeful entity he is trying to portray in his comment.

I know it's easy to generalize a certain group of people with whatever you hear from the news or read on the Internet, especially if you've not had too much meaningful interactions with individuals from that group. So I don't blame him, as I was somewhat similar before I came to the US and get to know the US people.

[rv-de]

First of all the practical difference between believing in something and behaving as if one believes in that is often neglectable. Especially when either of both things can be said about the majority of a society.

Secondly, nobody is immoral, nobody is vengeful or senseless - but having said that - the enemies of the state of course do not deserve moral standards as they don't adhere by those standards themselves ... "just watch the news if you want to know how many children they killed with their latest terror attack!".

The truth is - everybody loves slaughter bots as long as the right people get slaughtered - and who is that? Well, for the majority it's those labelled bad in the information sources they consume ... and are Chinese news independent? No, they aren't.

The Americans and Israelis love their drones - which aren't philosophically different from slaughter bots - and as long as those remove terrorists or taliban nobody would question those.