TOP

Are Americans “Simple” in the Eyes of China?

China’s Vice-Premier, Wang Quishan made a rare appearance for a Chinese government official on the Charlie Rose show on Monday, along with US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner. It was an hour-long segment, and Mr. Wang made his comments in Mandarin, but of course the US media picked up on one translation of one of his comments, translated as “…the American people, they’re a very simple people.” In US English, “simple” can imply “stupid”, which is why the sensationalist US media probably picked up on it, though there hasn’t been much indication that many Americans have interpreted it as such.

Some CNN Beijing producers were quick to point out that in addition to “simple” 单纯 can be translated as “innocent”, “straightforward”, or “not complicated,” in a good way. While others said that the tone can range from “neutral to patronizing”. The above-linked article from CNN goes on to say that Mr. Wang’s comments are most likely in reference to American “parochialism”… though this interpretation strikes me as a little funny… while there are plenty of cultural and geographic reasons why relatively few Americans (30%) have a passport, your likelihood of traveling abroad if you’re Chinese varies greatly depending on where you live, and is not as high as the United States, ranging from 1% to 20%.

What do Mr. Wang’s comments tell us about Chinese culture, and US culture? If we take CNN Beijing at face-value, and accept that 单纯 refers to “innocent”, “straightforward” “and not-complicated”, to me, these are indicators of 3 main areas of cultural difference between China and the United States:

• “Innocent” – The US has a much shorter history than China, and some of our ideals (Egalitarianism, etc.) can be perceived as a bit utopian, or even naïve by the Chinese. China has a very high Long-Term Orientation score on Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions, which is a reflection of both their long history, and their perception of that history. E.g.: “It is not easy to really know China because China is an ancient civilization…” – Wang Quishan

• “Straight-Forward” – Chinese people usually place a high value on keeping up appearances, not so much from a “keeping up with the Jones’s” angle, but rather emphasize maintaining “face” and honor in all situations. The Chinese tendency towards Indirect Communication is one of the better examples of this; if you just blurt out whatever you’re “really” thinking (like an American), you might lose face, or worse, you might cause someone else to lose face, and damage the relationships that are the very basis of China’s social fabric (Guanxi).

• “Not Complicated” – Americans tend to be Universalists; that is, they idealize applying the same set of rules and standards to all scenarios. Context isn’t supposed to matter much. This is in direct opposition the Chinese tendency towards Particularism – that is, words, actions, and behaviors must be tailored according to context. The “Golden Rule” is a good example, where Americans (often) expect that others will want to be treated the way that they themselves want to be treated. He may have meant that Americans tend to see the world in “black and white” terms, without the nuance that is more comon among the more high-context Chinese.

If you know specifically what Chinese and Americans value, the ways in which Americans and Chinese (and their governments and corporations) interact becomes a much more of a predictable process than a mystery. You can see here how developing an interculturally competent mindset becomes paramount for working, and doing business across cultures.

Read More
TOP

Dissecting Rep. Peter King’s Version of “Political Correctness”

“Let me make it clear today that I remain convinced that these hearings must go forward…To back down would be a craven surrender to political correctness…”

That was the opening statement of U.S. Rep. Peter King (R-NY), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, at the March 10th hearing on the “radicalization of Muslim Americans” – a radicalization purportedly driven by al Qaeda and its sympathizers. The purpose of this hearing was to investigate the American Muslim Community (a group of several million people) for “home-grown” Muslim radicalism in order to “protect America from terrorist attack.”

Apparently, in King’s view political correctness is something people “surrender” to – like we might surrender to an enemy or an illness.  We might infer that King sees political correctness as a form of censorship – suppressing or ignoring certain “truths” or “realities” that might cause offense or embarrassment.  To King, being politically correct is to “live in denial” (his words). 

Responding to criticism that the hearings should have a wider focus than just Muslims, King said, “There is no equivalency of threat between al Qaeda and neo-Nazis, environmental extremists or other isolated madmen. Only al Qaeda and its Islamist affiliates in this country are part of an international threat to our nation.”  King finds it easy to characterize Muslim-Americans as a group. Why? He is a member of the overwhelmingly dominant culture, speaking about a much smaller (and therefore much more visible in contrast) culture.  It might seem ridiculous to him to refer to the group of “isolated madmen” as “Christians” (or as “white” or “men” – as most of them have surely been), since Christians are the majority in this country and are considered the norm.  When things are perceived to be the norm, people who subscribe to it tend to be unconsciously blind to their own collective characteristics – in fact, most of them don’t even think they exist!  

Since it’s a lot easier (and more comfortable) for members of a dominant culture to see others in their own culture as unique individuals – rather than as members of a group – it’s much easier for many Christians like King to see environmental extremists, neo-Nazis, etc. as isolated madmen rather than as a group called “radicalized Christians.”  By King’s logic, if we took all the murderers in the U.S. in the last 100 years, and it turned out that 95% of them subscribed to Christian religions, you could say that Christians are the biggest threat to our nation and have been for a long, long time!  But that would be stereotypical, simplistic, and unfair.

We define stereotypes as either ascribing authentic cultural patterns to every member of a group, or ascribing characteristics to an entire group based on the behavior of a few.  And although King did say that “the overwhelming majority of Muslim-Americans are outstanding Americans,” he is unfortunately using his position of power to reinforce stereotypes about them.  He is, whether he intends to or not, promoting the view that the actions of a few can and should be applied to the entire group of Muslim-Americans.

Political correctness is not something that should be “surrendered to.”  It should not be used as an excuse to oversimplify or stereotype.  It is, in most cases, reflective of intercultural competence – that is, the ability to discern and take into account the complexity and realities of others’ worldviews and then take constructive action based on that knowledge.  And sometimes those actions include avoiding certain words that are considered culturally offensive to others, or refraining from speaking in or acting on stereotypes.  I would encourage King to learn more about Muslim American culture, its modern context and well as its history and the elements that have shaped this group of outstanding Americans, before making pronouncements about what he views as “realities”.   Then he will be better prepared to speak with intercultural competence – and perhaps be proud of his political correctness.

Read More