Indeed. On it's own, it looks like .. I'm not sure "willy-waving" translates into American well.
But once you realise they're sending them everywhere, it makes it look more like they've ramped production up to stupifying numbers (which is China's speciality afterall), and have realised their value in goodwill is far beyond their dollar value.
(or, yes, propaganda - there's not a lot of real difference between PR, propaganda and goodwill. Ultimately, doing something good because the optics benefit you, is still doing something good.)
I’m sure it helps that doing something good also makes them look good and shifts public perception of China from oppressive to we just helped save the world from an epidemic.
There’s no way the leadership has thought out all the angles.
I have no doubt his intention really is to save lives, but a secondary motive is surely also PR. Perhaps the Chinese state had some role in this, as well. I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, but I could see a possible benign conspiracy like them using Jack as a proxy to distribute these.
If they did it officially, it could be trusted less and the motive would seem more blatant. And Jack of course has enough money to do this himself, but such a big international move might require the approval of the government.
Is it? If the American government were doing this, I would think the exact same thing. And America has in fact done similar things many times in the past.
Of course it's PR. It's always PR, probably regardless of what superpower's government is involved. The only difference here is that the Chinese government has more control over and knowledge of what private citizens are doing, so it can be difficult to disentangle private and governmental action.
Do you feel the same way about Bill Gates' philanthropic work?
Is what Gates does also "always PR"?
Both of these men could afford to retire to a private island (or chain of islands) and never be heard from again. You think they do what they do primarily for PR reasons?
No. I would if I thought Bill Gates represented the US government, but I don't think he does.
The problem here is it's so hard to separate private and governmental action in China. Jack Ma may not have even been able to do this without their approval or prodding, possibly. Maybe he did, but there's no good way to know. Most other large countries don't have such powerful and expansive governments.
This is about geopolitics, not philanthropy. I think most philanthropists aren't doing things for PR, and for the ones who are, it's probably a minor, extra motive. But all bets are off when the philanthropist may be an ultra-powerful nation-state.
This "us vs them" mentality with strong whiff of paranoia. Conceiving ulterior motive and talking as if that was the most important motive. Somehow more true than all other parallel motives. I don't see this kind of thinking much out of US and perhaps Russia. Maybe it's taint of cold war. Maybe it runs even deeper in the culture.
I would think the same if it were the US or Russian government. Why do you think the US invested so much into feeding East Germany? It was to save lives, to regrow an economy, and for PR against the Soviets.
I'm a massive conspiracy theory skeptic and spend an inordinate amount of time trying to debunk them, but this is just how geopolitics work, have always worked, and will likely still work for centuries or millennia to come. Many actions have multiple motives.
Also, I'm just saying it's a possibility. It's just hard to know since it's so hard to separate government and private activities in such a place.
That's what I'm saying. And this specific way of thinking is focusing on the worst of the motives and treating them as if they were the main motives, the most important motives, the most worthwhile motives to observe and point out, maybe the only motives worth mentioning.
>...so it can be difficult to disentangle private and governmental action.
It's near impossible to disentangle private and government[al] action in China. It's also not a uniquely American way to think about it. Every country uses private proxies where it makes sense in order to project power.
But once you realise they're sending them everywhere, it makes it look more like they've ramped production up to stupifying numbers (which is China's speciality afterall), and have realised their value in goodwill is far beyond their dollar value.
(or, yes, propaganda - there's not a lot of real difference between PR, propaganda and goodwill. Ultimately, doing something good because the optics benefit you, is still doing something good.)