[-] xiaohongshu@hexbear.net 108 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

China vibe report: something absolutely wild took place on the Chinese internet this past week and I’ll be the first to report it. The kids are NOT ok!

TL;DR: Chinese Gen Z kids went full ultra Gang of Four yearning for a revival of the Cultural Revolution on bilibili (Chinese Youtube), what the hell is going on?

This came absolutely out of nowhere and took everyone by surprise. It’s truly one of the most insane things I’ve ever seen in the many years I’ve spent on the Chinese side of the internet.

It started with one of those Movie Explained channels offering analysis and interpretation of films. Run of the mill stuff. About a month ago, one of those channels began to upload a deconstruction of the 2017 film 芳华 (Youth), a coming of age/loss of innocence movie set in the backdrop of the Cultural Revolution about the lives and drama of the military art troupe kids, based on Yan Geling’s novel of the same name, which has been suspected to be her own semi-autobiography.

The film itself wasn’t overtly political or anything. It wasn’t without controversy before the theatrical release due to the Cultural Revolution backdrop, but after extensive cutting and reediting, the film was eventually released and went on the become one of the highest grossing films of the year.

However, the Movie Explained guy (no doubt on the more extreme/ultra left) offered a re-interpretation of the film, painting the Cultural Revolution as being hijacked by the elites from the very beginning, and after the reform and opening up era, the Gang of Four was vilified by the liberal reformers who rewrote history. Wild conspiracy take but what’s even wilder was the response to the videos (which have been released in three parts, with the final part that came out on November 29th being the most controversial, which essentially reinterpreted the film’s male protagonist as Wang Hongwen).

To give you an idea of what an absolute phenomenon this is, the three videos have a combined 37+ million views before the censorship hammer fell. Averaging about 12 million views per video, this is an insane number for bilibili, and was trending #1 at the time the videos were “disappeared” by the censors. As a comparison, the most sensational anti-Japan videos garnered about 2-3 million views at most - this is easily 4-5 times the volume of that.

Imagine Youtube’s #1 trending video. That’s how huge it was. This was never seen before for a politically themed video, let alone one on the Cultural Revolution.

And because bilibili has what is called the “bullet comments”, where user comments stream across the screen while a video is being played, and with hundreds of thousands of comments here’s what the screen looked like:

人民万岁 = Long Live the People. Slogan of the Cultural Revolution.

Clearly the kids are more into Cultural Revolution than anti-Japanese propaganda. What the hell is going on?

Let’s start with the film’s story to give some contexts:

The story is the typical rich kids bullying poor kids story. The male protagonist was a model socialist youth, who embodied the ideal of a revolutionary, always offering help to anyone without expecting anything in return, but because of his lower class, was always taken advantage of and held in disdained by the other elite/rich kids who were in the art troupe for “performative” reasons.

The female protagonist was a girl whose father was in the reeducation camp, and naively believed that by joining the communist youth cadre, she would be treated as equals. Instead, because of her lower class, she ended up getting bullied throughout by the elite/rich kids.

This scene from the film has been memed all over the chat groups right now and embodied the class divide that had infected the Cultural Revolution even from its very onset:

The elite kids (官二代, or 2nd generation elites) and rich kids (富二代) were able to enjoy special privileges in the “revolution” while looking down at the other kids from the lower classes. Such distinct class divide amongst the communist youth cadres, in a way, showed that the Cultural Revolution was doomed from the start.

The ending was particularly bleak:

spoiler: do not click if you want to watch the film for yourself, which I highly recommend.

The male protagonist was ostracized and in the reform era, was tasked to enlist in the invasion of Vietnam, lost his arm and lived miserably in the post-reform society. The female protagonist was driven mad.

The elite and rich kids were able to take advantage of the reform era through their status and became the first to reap the benefits of the post-Mao era, and they all married rich.

The ending in the novel was even more bleak. The film version actually made some adjustments to make it seem more bittersweet.

Strangely enough, when the film was aired in 2017, nobody really thought too much about it. It was mostly seen as a nostalgic film for the 50s/60s elderly who reminisced about their youth during the Cultural Revolution. The Gen Z kids were still too young/at school to appreciate its subtexts.

Remember that 2017-2019 was the peak of China’s economy. It was a time when everyone was very much positive about the future. Nobody even thought about such concerns as unemployment. As long as you’re willing to work hard, there will be jobs for you.

8 years later, the situation has completely changed. Upon re-watch, many young people, especially kids who saw it for the first time, felt the incomprehensible horror in the film itself.

Of course, visual language is everything, take a look:

At the start of the film, the red mural had a Mao painting with a hammer and sickle, which was very much emblematic of the revolutionary era.

By the time the protagonist returned in the reform era, the mural had been replaced with a red Coca-Cola advertisement, signifying the end of an era.

So how did we get here?

First of all, I do think that the re-interpretation videos had indeed over-interpreted the film itself, even though the visual languages are well representative of the latent contradictions of the time.

Second, I don’t think the Gen Z kids are really yearning for a real Cultural Revolution, widely held as the most destructive era of the PRC history.

Whether this was irony pilled Gen Z black humor, or whether they truly yearn for a rerun of the CR, it doesn’t matter. The explosive outbursts of their emotion had to be real. This was something that you could only feel when interacting with the youth, their hidden anger buried underneath, but nothing really actually manifested in real life.

Their collective outbursts in the form of bilibili comments revealed their true reaction to the film - the loss of their Youth, a funeral of their Future.

And it makes sense. As I have said before, post-Covid China is a very different world than the 2010s. Chinese kids are seeing their futures evaporating in front of them. These are the kids who studied hard for years, just to be told that there are no jobs for them, the houses are way beyond what they could possibly afford, and that a bright future that had been promised not even 10 years ago is disappearing before them.

It’s like being told that the train is already full, and you are being left behind at the train station. The train that just departed was class mobility - a door that has now shut for most Chinese youth.

They are experiencing a strong dissonance that while the country is becoming stronger, as China is becoming a world superpower, yet the fruits of the hard work do not belong to them. The future of a nation where they are not a part of.

Their anger is to be expected, and a yearning for a Cultural Revolution that at least promises shake up the entrenchment of the social classes. The chaos and destruction would hurt the rich elites the most, dragging them down to the level of the average working people who are struggling for the next paycheck.

For context, understand that the accumulation of capital that took several hundred years in Western capitalist countries, occurred in China in just 50 years. Everything has been evolving so fast, and so does the wealth inequality.

In 2007, nobody would have anticipated what China would look like today. That’s what it feels like to grow up in China. In Western countries, the wealth distribution is divided in generations, where the boomers/Gen X reaped the industrialization benefits while the Gen Y and especially Gen Zs are already accustomed to a relatively bleak future since they were born.

However, in China, this was not the experience. If you’re a Gen Z kid born in the late 1990s (in China they’re called post-90s and post-00s), you would have grown up just after the recession, with your parents having a relatively well paid job in the 2000s (compared to the 90s). Things were starting to look better. By the 2010s, in your middle and high schools, your parents likely bought a new house. An upgrade. The economy was looking better by the day. You’re promised that as long as you study hard, you’ll be able to find a good job and raise your own family one day.

Then Covid hit just when you’re about to graduate college, and the economy never returned. Years of hard work down the drain. All this rollercoaster happened in less than 30 years of your life.

18

Excellent breakdown on the record youth turnout - this demonstrates that left wing populist ideas are still very popular among the young people in the US!

[-] xiaohongshu@hexbear.net 95 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

This is causing a lot of overreaction on the Chinese internet right now since the past 48 hours lol.

Do people want details? Lots of racism and xenophobia though, especially from the nationalists who have been laughing about “Western countries being destroyed by mass immigration, Canada being invaded by Indians” etc. now crying the loudest about the new policy. No, your provincial town is Sichuan isn’t going to be flooded by “inferior” foreigners lol.

There are some legit criticisms though, for example, people complain about how even Chinese people with Masters and PhD degrees have trouble finding employment, so how are foreigners with Bachelors degree going to help? They are worried about the labor market becoming even more competitive.

The funniest part is that I don’t even expect many foreigners to apply because the language barrier is significant (like, no Chinese company is going to hire someone who cannot even speak semi-proficient Chinese because the managers themselves can’t communicate in English), but the wild overreaction on Chinese social media before anything has even happened is amusing to watch at least. Have to say I am kinda disappointed by my own people.

Anyway, so far what we know is: no language requirement, no employment required, 0.5-5 years stay, only require a Bachelors degree for qualification. So, here’s your chance to live in China, Hexbears!

[-] xiaohongshu@hexbear.net 103 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Where are the people who keep telling me that China cannot do anything about a genocide that has become an international issue?

96
submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by xiaohongshu@hexbear.net to c/chapotraphouse@hexbear.net

Source

Usually, they only censor the explicit content. But this is the first time that AI tools were used to directly alter the content of the original film.

By the way, the film has been withdrawn from a wide release in China after receiving too many complaints.

205

The effect was more pronounced in countries with larger Communist Parties. Capitalism did not reduce working hours on its own.

Saw this on twitter.

Link to the book pdf: Reforming to Survive: The Bolshevik Origins of Social Policies

[-] xiaohongshu@hexbear.net 128 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Checking in on the news mega - and what the hell someone tried to impersonate this account?

I honestly don’t know what happened but if the vibe’s wrong, it’s not me lol.

And in case anyone is wondering, long story short, laptop died together with hundreds of sources/references/links and pages and pages of notes I’ve written up. No backup on the cloud. Decided to touch grass and forget about the site. May or may not return as a regular. Meanwhile, I hope everyone has been doing well. The world hasn’t been kind lately and certainly hasn’t to me in many ways. Hang in there, everyone.

Edit: also in case anyone wants to hear my thoughts about the recent events, I wrote a long comment in this thread. May not be everyone’s cup of tea, and if so, just treat it as an entertaining read. Happy to be proven wrong.

[-] xiaohongshu@hexbear.net 98 points 1 year ago

What we know about China’s retaliatory measures against the US

As we reported earlier, China’s Finance Ministry has slapped tariffs on certain American items in retaliation for the Trump administration’s 10 percent tariff on all Chinese goods entering the US.

Here are more details on China’s tit for tat levies:

  • Starting on February 10, China will impose levies of 15 percent for US coal and LNG and 10% for crude oil, farm equipment and some autos.
  • China’s Commerce Ministry and its Customs Administration said the country is also imposing export controls on tungsten, tellurium, ruthenium, molybdenum and ruthenium-related items to “safeguard national security interests”.
  • China’s anti-monopoly regulator has also announced it is launching an investigation into Google, without offering details. Google products, including its search engine, are blocked in China, but it works with local partners, including advertisers, in the country.
[-] xiaohongshu@hexbear.net 98 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

One Republic became the first ever American band to perform on the CCTV New Year’s Gala (春晚), live from the Wuhan stage

Why? Because during Covid lockdown, frontman Ryan Tedder came out in support of Wuhan amidst waves of anti-China sentiment, livestreaming himself enjoying the Wuhan hot dry noodle, and promised that one day he would visit the city of Wuhan!

Wuhan hot dry noodle as imagined by Tedder using spaghetti noodles:

Wuhan (武汉) hot dry noodle tattoo:

He finally got his wish to perform in front of the entire nation today, straight from Wuhan itself!

Yes, this is news.

[-] xiaohongshu@hexbear.net 98 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The Short Case for Nvidia Stock

This is not a finance article nor is it financial advice despite the title (I do not condone any gambling nor do I hold any positions on Nvidia, just obligatory disclaimer here), but genuinely an excellent breakdown of the DeepSeek “breakthrough”.

To quote from a summary I read from Twitter:

  • Use 8 bit instead of 32 bit floating point numbers, which gives massive memory savings
  • Compress the key-value indices which eat up much of the VRAM; they get 93% compression ratios
  • Do multi-token prediction instead of single-token prediction which effectively doubles inference speed
  • Mixture of Experts model decomposes a big model into small models that can run on consumer-grade GPUs

That’s it! There is nothing groundbreaking about DeepSeek. There is no fundamentally new invention here (compared to the original transformer architecture). It’s simply a bunch of Chinese interns looking for shortcuts to bypass the tech sanctions, and stumbled upon a simple yet elegant solution to the problem.

What is groundbreaking though is that apparently none of the OpenAI engineers getting paid >500k per year managed to come up with a solution like this.

And this really is an indictment of the entire field of “AI”, the kind of people who are getting paid a fortune, and how overhyped, bloated and unrealistic it is to burn through $500 billion to chase their AGI scam which is never going to work. (The real AGI is as far as you can get from the current iterations of artificial neural networks based architecture, and we barely have any idea what it would look like).

The question is will it burst the AI bubble? Are we getting another AI winter? Or the US government will find a way around it like it did with all the crypto scam bullshit or the trillion dollar F-35 project?

[-] xiaohongshu@hexbear.net 95 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

When 50 thousand people were evacuated from the city of Pripyat following the Chernobyl incident in 1986, the Soviet government built an entirely new city, Slavutych in just two years, 50km away, to accommodate those who lost their homes.

From the start, Slavutych was planned to become a "21st-century city". Compared to other cities in Ukraine, Slavutych has a modern architecture with pleasant surroundings, and the standard of living in the city is much higher than in most other Ukrainian cities.

This would be the last city the Soviet Union would ever build. The entire country would collapse in just two years’ time, but they managed to do something like this.

[-] xiaohongshu@hexbear.net 102 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Educational post: here we will debunk the myth of China’s dollar-denominated bonds in Saudi Arabia for those who are interested in learning about how the system actually works, and those who need a little help with connecting the dots.

A few months ago, some multipolar bloggers were jumping up and down about Saudi Arabia “ending its 50-year petrodollar contract” and how that is going to “end dollar hegemony” (I already wrote a whole post debunking that). Today we see the same people saying that China issuing dollar-denominated bonds in Saudi Arabia is actually genius and how that’s going to “end dollar hegemony”. So which one is it?

The answer is neither, and far simpler than you think. But to even be able to answer this question, we need to learn a bit about the fundamentals of the financial system, and especially to debunk the many misconceptions about the role of US treasury.

Don’t worry, I have deliberately stripped all technical jargons from this post, so anyone will be able to understand even if you know nothing about banking and finance. This post is meant to be educational - I firmly believe that learning about how the economy and the financial system operate can shield us from falling for right wing propaganda, and that is my goal of spending many hours writing this post here.

First, let’s lay out the main misconceptions that have been perpetuated on social media about the China’s dollar bond in Saudi Arabia, and what questions do we need to answer:

  1. The misconception that the US government is financed by its treasury bonds (China is issuing dollar bonds at nearly the same rates, so investors will buy China bonds instead of US treasury bonds, so the US government can no longer finance its spending)
    • Question: What is the role of US treasuries?
  2. A wild extrapolation that a $2 billion bond issuance somehow serves as a prelude to China issuing a $100 billion dollar bond which will then subvert the entire US treasury market.
    • Question: What can a $100 billion dollar bond do if China issues that?
  3. The mental gymnastics involved to craft a narrative about why China issuing its bond in dollar in Saudi Arabia is actually good and that somehow is going to help the BRI countries pay back their dollar debt.
    • Questions: What is the intent behind China issuing dollar-denominated bond in Saudi Arabia? Can it really help Belt and Road countries pay back their dollar debt?

Let’s go through this point by point.

What is the role of US treasuries?

expand

Many people will tell you that a government needs to borrow (treasury issuing bonds/securities) to finance its spending. Here, we see the same narrative that if everyone stops buying US treasuries, the US government would not be able to finance its imperialism.

This is no different than the popular neoliberal myth perpetuated by both the Republicans and the Democrats that “we have to cut our spending and bring our deficits down because we have borrowed trillions of dollars from China!”

What they really mean is that “we have to cut funding to this and that public utilities and services so all the wealth can be concentrated to the top 0.1%”. In other words, myths like this allow the ruling class to institute austerity on the working people, otherwise “your children and grandchildren will become debt slaves to China who owns our country and they have to work so much harder to pay back our debt to China!”

Let’s dispel this myth once and for all by learning about where did this myth even comes from.

Do government have to borrow to finance its spending?

You see, a long time ago when governments peg their currencies to gold (or under Bretton Woods from 1944-1971, to US dollar which is in turn pegged to gold), they run on a fixed exchange rate. This means that the government promises that its currency can be exchanged for gold (or dollar) at a certain price. If the government cannot keep that promise, they will have to default, or depreciate the value of their currency (exchange rate goes down, imports become more expensive).

A main attraction of pegging your currency to a stable metal like gold, or another stable currency like the dollar, is that it helps boost the confidence and usage of your currency. This was especially true for post-war European countries after their economies had been wrecked by WWII, and those governments desperately needed their citizens to use their currencies again (that were worth very little because the productive capacities had been destroyed) instead of foreign currencies. And so during the Bretton Woods conference, they decided that their governments would peg their currencies to the dollar, and the dollar itself to gold, with the hopes that this will help stabilize the currency exchange rate and hence the development of their economies.

However, there is a huge problem when you run on a fixed exchange rate - you need to have a reserve of the metal/foreign currency in order to defend this exchange rate, and this quickly becomes a problem when it comes to fiscal operations (government spending):

Let’s say you are a government with $100 billion worth of gold reserve, and have issued $100 billion of your currency to circulate the economy. Now, you want to spend $10 billion to build new hospitals for the country, to improve the healthcare standards for the people. Of course, you can just print $10 billion and credit the bank accounts of contractors, raw material suppliers and manufacturers and let them get to work, but you will now have $110 billion circulating the economy with only $100 billion worth of gold reserve, and this is a problem because you do not have enough reserve to defend the fixed exchange rate you have set.

You have several options here:

One, you can increase gold supply

  • search and dig for more gold
  • purchase gold by exporting your goods and services made using your labor and resources to countries that have a lot of gold
  • steal the gold by colonizing or invading other countries who have them

Two, you will have to somehow take $10 billion currency away from the economy.

There are two common ways to do this - first, increase the taxes so you can subtract $10 billion from the economy, which brings monetary base down to $90 billion, and this frees up the space for you to issue a new $10 billion currencies to build the new hospitals.

This is where the popular misconception that taxes finance government budget come from. But as you can see, the taxes really only serve the purpose of taking money out of the circulation so new money can be added to finance new projects. Those taxed money are instead destroyed in the central bank, contrary to the popular myth that they are being used to finance government spending.

Governments that can issue their own money don’t need your taxes - why would they do that if they can already print them? The purpose of taxation is to drive the value of your currency (you are forced to earn the currency because you have to pay taxes with them), and to re-distribute wealth within the society (rich people accumulating too much wealth? Tax them away so they don’t grow too powerful, not because the government needs to be financed by billionaires - of course this does not apply in governments that have been captured by the wealthy elites, but the concept of the power of the State still applies)

The second way is to issue government securities/bonds (in the US, this is known as the US treasury bills/notes/bonds). Instead of taking away your money which many people hate, here the government says: ”hey what if you give me some of your money and I’ll keep them safe for you and in a few years’ time when they mature, I’ll pay you back with interests?”

As you can see, the function of a government bond is the same as taxes - taking money out of circulation, except that instead of the money getting destroyed through taxation, your money is being safekept in a special government savings account (the government’s version of certificate of deposit) and you are not allowed to use them until the bond matures. Then you get your money back with interests.

Because the government is technically “borrowing” from you, this is known as government debt, and you are the creditor lending money to the government. This is where the popular misconception that government debt finances government spending comes from. But really, they just want to take some money out of the circulation so they can defend their exchange rate during new budget spending.

And finally, if the government cannot fulfill its promise of exchanging their currency at the price they have set with reference to gold/dollar, they will have to default, or depreciate the value of their currency.

The above was how they roll during the fixed exchange rate era, and where all these misconceptions about US treasuries comes from.

8
view more: next ›

xiaohongshu

0 post score
0 comment score
joined 2 years ago