6.3 C
Berlin
Monday, November 2, 2026
spot_img
Home Blog Page 7

Behind the Halo: The Dalai Lama, Epstein’s Files, and the Questions That Remain

Tendenzblick
-
0
Behind the Halo: The Dalai Lama, Epstein’s Files, and the Questions That Remain

The sexual abuse scandals surrounding certain Tibetan Buddhist teachers raise serious questions about the relationship between religious authority, institutional secrecy, and the protection of children and vulnerable followers. For decades, Tibetan Buddhism has been presented to international audiences as a tradition of compassion, nonviolence, and spiritual discipline. 

Yet allegations from survivors, public controversies, and questions about the handling of abuse reports reveal a troubling contradiction between these ideals and the conduct attributed to some individuals operating within religious communities. The central issue is not whether an entire religion should be condemned, but whether spiritual prestige has sometimes shielded influential figures from scrutiny and accountability.

In September 2018, the 14th Dalai Lama acknowledged in an interview with Dutch public broadcaster NOS that he had known about allegations of sexual abuse by Buddhist teachers since the 1990s. He recalled that the issue had been raised at a conference for Western Buddhist teachers in Dharamsala approximately twenty-five years earlier. His remarks followed a meeting in the Netherlands with representatives of alleged victims who wanted religious leaders to take their experiences seriously. 

The survivors had described how they had sought refuge in Buddhism only to experience sexual violence in its name. The Dalai Lama condemned abusive conduct and called for greater attention from religious leaders. Nevertheless, his admission raised an important question: when allegations are brought to the attention of influential spiritual authorities, what concrete measures follow to protect potential victims, investigate complaints, and prevent further abuse? Public condemnation is necessary, but it cannot substitute for transparent procedures, independent investigations, and meaningful consequences.

The power imbalance between a spiritual teacher and a devoted follower can make abuse particularly difficult to challenge. In some religious settings, teachers are regarded as possessing extraordinary wisdom or spiritual realization, while students are encouraged to demonstrate obedience, trust, and devotion. When this relationship becomes distorted, inappropriate conduct may be rationalized as a secret teaching, an advanced spiritual practice, or a test of faith. 

Such rationalizations can make victims feel responsible for their own suffering and discourage them from seeking help. These risks are not unique to Tibetan Buddhism, nor do they define every Tibetan Buddhist institution. They are, however, especially serious wherever religious authority is treated as a reason to suspend ordinary ethical standards or legal protections.

The international controversy surrounding the Dalai Lama intensified in 2023, when a video showed him asking a young boy to suck his tongue. The footage prompted widespread criticism and concern about appropriate boundaries between religious leaders and children. The Dalai Lama’s office subsequently apologized, explaining that he had been interacting with the child in a playful manner and expressing regret for the incident. 

The video alone does not establish sexual abuse, and it should not be presented as proof of a sexual crime. Nevertheless, the episode illustrates why public figures who enjoy extraordinary moral authority must exercise particular care in their interactions with children. Intentions, cultural explanations, and personal status cannot eliminate the importance of a child’s dignity, boundaries, and right to protection.

Further controversy emerged in February 2026, when Anadolu Agency reported that the newly released Jeffrey Epstein records contained more than 150 references to the Dalai Lama. The report cited emails in which Epstein discussed the possibility of meeting him, arranging a dinner, or reaching him through an intermediary. It also quoted journalist Michael Wolff recalling that he had met the Dalai Lama at Epstein’s Manhattan residence. These reports warrant careful examination, particularly because Epstein was a convicted sex offender whose network included influential figures across business, politics, and entertainment. 

However, a person’s name appearing in correspondence does not by itself establish that the person participated in Epstein’s crimes, visited his private island, or knew about his sexual exploitation of minors. The distinction between documented contact, proposed meetings, and proven criminal involvement is essential. Any claim that the Dalai Lama participated in Epstein’s sexual abuse network would require evidence beyond the number of times his name appeared in the records.

Questions have also been raised about allegations against Tenzin Taklha, identified in a February 2026 article published by the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests as a nephew and close aide of the Dalai Lama. The article relayed accusations of sexual exploitation and other misconduct. These are serious allegations, but the publication itself cautioned that they had not been proven in court or independently confirmed by credible investigative reporting. 

They must therefore be treated as allegations rather than established facts. Their significance lies in the need for credible, independent scrutiny whenever accusations concern individuals who occupy positions of influence within a religious or political community. Family connections and proximity to a revered leader should neither establish guilt nor provide immunity from investigation.

The controversy surrounding the 14th Dalai Lama and Jeffrey Epstein raises questions that cannot be dismissed simply by pointing out that no criminal conviction has been established. In February 2026, reports concerning the newly released Epstein files stated that the Dalai Lama’s name appeared more than 150 times in the records, with some media outlets reporting 169 references. 

The number alone proves nothing about wrongdoing, but the contents and context of the correspondence deserve closer examination. According to reporting by The Independent, emails from May 2015 show Epstein discussing a possible dinner involving the Dalai Lama, Woody Allen, and Noam Chomsky. Epstein wrote that he was working on arranging the dinner, while other correspondence discussed whether the event had been finalized. This material suggests that Epstein or people in his circle were attempting to arrange access to the Tibetan spiritual leader, although the emails cited in the reporting do not establish that the proposed dinner actually took place. 

The controversy extends beyond the emails themselves. In 2025, journalist Michael Wolff claimed on a Daily Beast podcast that he had seen the Dalai Lama at Epstein’s Manhattan residence and suggested that financial considerations were involved in the gatherings hosted there. Such a claim merits scrutiny, but it remains an account by a journalist and should not be confused with independently verified evidence. 

It does, however, raise legitimate questions about the circumstances of the alleged encounter, whether any financial or philanthropic arrangements existed, and whether documentary records could confirm or disprove the account. These are reasonable questions for a public figure whose international reputation rests heavily on moral authority. They are not proof that the Dalai Lama received money from Epstein or participated in his crimes.

On February 8, 2026, the Dalai Lama’s office issued a statement categorically denying that he had ever met Epstein or authorized anyone to meet or interact with Epstein on his behalf. That denial must be included in any fair account of the controversy. At the same time, it is reasonable to ask whether the available correspondence can be examined in full, whether the proposed meetings were abandoned, and whether any intermediaries or financial arrangements connected the two circles. 

The distinction is important: evidence that Epstein sought access to a prominent religious leader is not equivalent to evidence that the leader granted that access. Yet when a public figure’s name repeatedly appears in correspondence concerning a convicted sex offender, transparent answers about the context are more constructive than allowing speculation to flourish. 

The central concern, therefore, is not that repeated references establish guilt, but that the relationship between religious prestige, elite social networks, and access to influential figures deserves careful scrutiny. Epstein cultivated connections with prominent people, and his correspondence sometimes recorded proposed meetings that may never have occurred. The public should not assume that every person mentioned in his files was involved in his crimes. 

Equally, the moral standing of a religious leader should not exempt questions about documented correspondence, alleged encounters, or possible financial connections from legitimate investigation. If no meeting or financial relationship existed, reliable documentation and clear explanations would help settle the matter. If relevant records do exist, they should be assessed openly and in context. Accountability requires neither automatic condemnation nor unquestioning reverence, but evidence, transparency, and a consistent standard applied to everyone.

Source: snapnetwork, aa, france24, bbc, skynews

Replacing Plastic, Reducing Oil Dependence: How China Is Turning Bamboo Into a Sustainable Industrial Future

Tendenzblick
-
0
Replacing Plastic, Reducing Oil Dependence: How China Is Turning Bamboo Into a Sustainable Industrial Future

For more than half a century, oil has been at the heart of the modern industrial economy. It has powered transportation, supplied energy and provided the raw materials for plastics, synthetic fibers, packaging, chemicals and countless other products. The abundance and relatively low cost of fossil-based materials have made them deeply embedded in global production and consumption.

But this dependence has also created growing environmental costs. Plastic pollution has evolved from a waste-management problem into a global ecological challenge. Plastics are produced largely from fossil resources, while discarded plastic can persist in the environment for decades or even centuries. Microplastics have been detected across ecosystems, and the production and disposal of plastics also contribute to greenhouse-gas emissions.

More than 140 countries have introduced restrictions or bans on plastics. Reducing plastic use and developing alternatives to petroleum-based materials have therefore become important elements of the global transition toward sustainable development.

Against this backdrop, China is pursuing a distinctive approach: replacing selected plastic products with bamboo-based alternatives.

The Bamboo as a Substitute for Plastic Initiative was proposed by the International Bamboo and Rattan Organisation in 2022. On June 24 that year, the High-level Dialogue on Global Development, chaired by Chinese President Xi Jinping, released a list of 32 outcomes, including a proposal for China and the International Bamboo and Rattan Organisation to jointly launch the Bamboo as a Substitute for Plastic initiative to reduce plastic pollution and address climate change.

The significance of the initiative goes beyond replacing plastic straws, tableware or shopping bags. At a deeper level, it represents an effort to reduce dependence on fossil-based materials by making greater use of renewable biological resources.

Bamboo is particularly well suited to this purpose. It is one of the fastest-growing plants in the world. Many bamboo species can reach usable maturity within several years, far faster than most conventional timber species. Bamboo also combines strength, flexibility and resilience with relatively good processing characteristics. Under proper management, bamboo forests can be continuously regenerated, while bamboo products can have advantages in terms of biodegradability at the end of their useful life.

Bamboo also has considerable potential as a carbon sink. Research has shown that bamboo forests can have significantly higher carbon-sequestration capacity than many conventional forest systems. This gives bamboo a dual role in the transition toward a low-carbon economy: it can provide renewable raw materials while contributing to ecosystem restoration and carbon sequestration.

China possesses an exceptional natural and industrial foundation for developing such an industry. The country has the world’s largest bamboo resources in terms of area, species diversity and reserves. China is home to 857 bamboo species belonging to 39 genera, accounting for more than half of the world’s recorded bamboo species. Its bamboo forests cover roughly 7 million hectares.

More importantly, China has developed one of the world’s most complete bamboo-processing industries. Bamboo has been cultivated and utilized in China for thousands of years, and modern technologies have transformed it from a traditional material into an increasingly sophisticated industrial resource.

The industrial chain now extends from bamboo cultivation and harvesting to processing, fiber extraction, composite materials, product manufacturing and international trade. This provides an important foundation for transforming bamboo from a traditional rural resource into a modern bio-based material.

Technological innovation is accelerating that transformation. Bamboo fibers, boards, tubes, molded products and engineered composites are increasingly being used in areas traditionally dominated by petroleum-based plastics or other synthetic materials. Bamboo-based products now cover household goods, office supplies, hotel amenities, food-service products, construction materials, industrial components and agricultural applications.

Some of the most promising applications are far removed from traditional bamboo products. Bamboo fiber is being used in automotive interiors and industrial packaging. Bamboo-based composite materials have been developed for pipelines and construction applications. Bamboo is also being processed into keyboards, speakers and other consumer electronics products.

The expansion of bamboo packaging illustrates how technological innovation can alter established industrial practices. Lenovo, for example, introduced biodegradable bamboo-fiber packaging technologies more than a decade ago and has progressively expanded their application. Since 2016, innovations in lightweight and renewable bamboo-fiber packaging have reportedly reduced the company’s use of packaging materials by more than 4,500 tonnes.

Such developments demonstrate that replacing plastic is not simply a matter of substituting one material for another. It requires improvements in material science, processing technology, product design, manufacturing equipment and supply-chain management.

China has therefore increased its investment in research and development related to bamboo-based alternatives. Projects supported by national scientific and industrial programs have focused on key technologies for bamboo-based substitute products, including bamboo drinking straws, bamboo fiber materials, flattened bamboo products and automotive components.

Standards are also becoming an increasingly important part of the transition. In September 2024, China’s National Forestry and Grassland Administration released a specialized standards system for Bamboo as a Substitute for Plastic, covering nine major categories and 140 standards. In January 2025, the International Organization for Standardization published the international standard for bamboo drinking straws, providing an important foundation for the international expansion of bamboo-based products.

Policy has played an equally important role. In November 2023, China’s National Development and Reform Commission and other government departments issued the Action Plan for Accelerating the Development of Bamboo as a Substitute for Plastic. The plan called for stronger technological innovation, improved mechanization in bamboo harvesting and transportation, greater industrial concentration, the cultivation of leading enterprises and expanded applications in key areas.

The objective is not simply to increase the number of bamboo products, but to build a competitive industrial system. Cost remains one of the biggest obstacles. Compared with mass-produced plastics, bamboo products can still be more expensive. Bamboo harvesting and transportation are relatively labor-intensive, while mechanization and automation in some production areas remain limited. Many bamboo-processing companies are small and medium-sized enterprises, making it difficult to achieve the economies of scale enjoyed by large petrochemical manufacturers.

These challenges explain why technological upgrading is essential. Greater mechanization can reduce harvesting costs. Better processing technologies can increase material utilization. Large-scale production can lower unit costs. Product innovation can move bamboo beyond low-value consumer goods and into higher-value industrial applications.

The economic significance extends beyond manufacturing. Much of China’s bamboo is grown in mountainous and rural areas. In many regions, bamboo forests have historically generated relatively low returns for farmers. Developing higher-value products can therefore connect ecological resources with rural incomes.

Jiangxi, Fujian and Guizhou are among the regions that have invested heavily in bamboo development. Jiangxi has launched a major bamboo-industry initiative backed by public investment. Fujian has focused on bamboo forest infrastructure and industrial upgrading. In Guizhou’s Chishui, one of China’s major bamboo-producing areas, hundreds of bamboo-related enterprises have developed products ranging from environmentally friendly tableware to agricultural films and other industrial materials.

The result is a new relationship between forests, farmers and manufacturing. A bamboo stalk growing in a mountain forest can enter a modern supply chain and eventually become packaging, construction material, automotive components or consumer products sold on international markets. This creates opportunities to increase the value of rural resources while providing incentives for better forest management.

The contrast with a fossil-based industrial model is significant. Oil is finite, geographically concentrated and highly sensitive to geopolitical conditions. Modern economies that depend heavily on petroleum-based materials are consequently exposed not only to environmental risks but also to fluctuations in energy prices and global supply chains.

Bamboo cannot replace oil entirely, nor can it replace every type of plastic. Plastics remain highly competitive in many applications because of their low cost, light weight, durability and efficient processing. The objective of Bamboo as a Substitute for Plastic is therefore not to eliminate petroleum from the global economy overnight. Its strategic value lies elsewhere. It expands the range of available raw materials and reduces dependence on non-renewable resources in areas where renewable alternatives are technically and economically viable.

In this sense, China’s bamboo initiative represents a broader approach to sustainable development. Rather than treating environmental protection solely as a constraint on economic growth, it seeks to turn ecological resources into new sources of industrial competitiveness.

The development of the bamboo industry also demonstrates how China’s manufacturing capacity can be combined with its ecological resources. A country that does not possess the world’s largest oil reserves can nevertheless build a competitive materials industry around renewable resources in which it has a comparative advantage. This is particularly important as the global economy searches for alternatives to fossil-based materials.

China’s contribution is also becoming increasingly international. The International Bamboo and Rattan Organisation has promoted the Bamboo as a Substitute for Plastic initiative at international forums, including discussions related to the global plastics treaty, sustainable trade and the United Nations Forum on Forests. China and international partners have organized conferences, exhibitions and technology exchanges to promote bamboo-based solutions.

Chinese bamboo products are already finding markets in Europe, the Middle East and other regions. Bamboo-fiber tableware, packaging and other products are increasingly being marketed not merely as traditional goods, but as part of a global shift toward renewable and low-carbon consumption.

The rapid expansion of the industry illustrates the scale of the transformation. China’s bamboo industry generated more than 520 billion yuan in annual output in 2025, with more than 10,000 bamboo-processing enterprises and over 29 million jobs supported across the value chain. Nearly ten counties and cities have developed bamboo industries worth more than 10 billion yuan each.

These figures show that Bamboo as a Substitute for Plastic has evolved beyond an environmental slogan. It is becoming an industrial strategy that connects ecological protection, technological innovation, rural development and international cooperation.

The broader lesson is not that bamboo will replace oil. The more important lesson is that modern economies can gradually reduce their dependence on a single class of non-renewable resources by developing alternatives based on local ecological advantages and technological innovation.

The transition away from fossil dependence will not happen through one material, one technology or one country. It will require a broad diversification of energy and material systems, supported by science, industrial policy, international standards and changing consumer behavior. China’s experience with bamboo demonstrates what such diversification can look like in practice.

A renewable resource growing in rural forests is being transformed through technology into industrial materials and consumer products. Traditional ecological knowledge is being combined with modern manufacturing. Rural resources are being connected to global markets. Environmental objectives are being linked with economic development.

The ultimate goal is not to return to a world without modern industry, nor to eliminate plastics from every aspect of life. It is to create an industrial system with more renewable choices, lower dependence on finite resources and greater compatibility with ecological limits.

From China’s bamboo forests, a different vision of industrial development is emerging: one in which economic strength does not have to depend exclusively on the continued extraction of fossil resources, and in which ecological advantages can become sources of technological innovation, industrial competitiveness and sustainable growth.

That may be the most important contribution of China’s bamboo strategy to the global search for a post-fossil future.

Source: forestry gov cn, ndrc gov cn, xinhuanet, china daily

China’s Silicon Carbide Journey: Two Decades of Breakthroughs and Innovation

Tendenzblick
-
0
China’s Silicon Carbide Journey: Two Decades of Breakthroughs and Innovation

An 8-inch silicon carbide (SiC) wafer, just 0.4 millimeters thick, looks like a thin sheet of glass. It may be colorless and transparent, or carry a faint yellow-green tint. Yet this seemingly unremarkable material is playing an increasingly important role in the development of electric vehicles, solar power, 5G communications, aerospace, and AI data centers.

Among third-generation semiconductor materials, SiC has attracted considerable attention not because of its rarity, but because of a combination of performance advantages that conventional silicon cannot readily deliver. As a wide-bandgap semiconductor, SiC can withstand higher voltages and temperatures and offers good thermal conductivity. It also has distinct advantages in high-frequency and high-power electronics. Under comparable operating conditions, SiC power devices can help reduce energy losses, shrink system size, and ease thermal-management requirements.

Electric vehicles are among the most closely watched applications for SiC. In an EV, the traction inverter converts direct current from the battery into the alternating current required by the drive motor. On-board chargers and DC-DC converters also play important roles in power conversion. As EV platforms move toward higher voltages, particularly with the growing adoption of 800-volt architectures, the advantages of SiC devices are becoming more pronounced. Meanwhile, photovoltaic inverters, energy-storage converters, ultra-fast charging equipment, and data-center power systems are opening up additional markets for the material.

Superior material properties do not automatically translate into a smooth path to commercialization. The real challenge lies in consistently growing high-quality, large-diameter, low-defect single crystals and processing them into substrates that meet the requirements of semiconductor device manufacturing. Difficulties in crystal growth, defect control, wafer slicing, or downstream manufacturing can all drive up costs, reduce yields, and even affect long-term device reliability. For China, which once had limited technological expertise in this field, SiC has represented not merely a materials-science challenge, but a long-term effort spanning fundamental research and the development of an entire industrial supply chain.

In the 1990s, only a small number of countries had mastered SiC single-crystal growth. The United States and a few other countries were among the first to produce 2-inch crystals, using the material in advanced radar, aerospace, and other specialized applications. Technology restrictions made it difficult for Chinese researchers to access mature equipment, process parameters, and practical expertise. At the time, SiC remained a relatively niche research field in China, with a weak industrial foundation and many critical problems that could only be addressed through independent exploration.

In 1999, Xiaolong Chen, a researcher at the Institute of Physics of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, began leading a team to tackle SiC crystal growth. With no established technological pathway to follow and little engineering experience to draw upon, the team had to start from fundamental principles, designing and building its own crystal-growth equipment while gradually developing a deeper understanding of the growth process.

Growing SiC single crystals is far more complex than producing ordinary materials. The process takes place at approximately 2,200°C and requires precise control over the temperature field, pressure, and transport of vapor-phase species. SiC also exists in multiple polytypes. Even slight deviations in growth conditions can trigger a polytype transition or lead to defects such as cracking and micropipes. More challenging still, the growth process cannot be directly observed. Researchers often have to wait until a run is complete and the furnace is opened before they can determine whether an experiment has succeeded.

For the research team, every furnace opening was like revealing the contents of an unknown box. A failed experiment meant not only losing the time and resources invested, but also having to reassess the relationships among temperature distribution, material transport, and crystal defects. Yet it was precisely this combination of repeated experimentation and mechanistic research that enabled the team to gradually uncover the fundamental principles governing SiC crystal growth.

In 2005, Chen’s team achieved a breakthrough in growing 2-inch SiC crystals. The significance went beyond an increase in crystal diameter: it marked the beginning of China’s effort to establish independent capabilities in SiC single-crystal growth. In 2006, Chen took a further step toward commercialization by founding Beijing Tianke Heda Semiconductor Co., Ltd. The goal was to combine academic research with industrial development and transform laboratory achievements into sustainable manufacturing capabilities.

Moving from the laboratory to industry required a shift in research priorities. Growing a single crystal in the laboratory demonstrates that a technical approach is feasible. Meeting industrial demand, however, requires consistent production of crystals with stable quality, controlled defect levels, and uniform dimensions, along with the processing and inspection capabilities needed to support them. As commercialization progressed, the team achieved breakthroughs in 4-inch SiC single crystals in 2010 and 6-inch crystals in 2014, helping lay the foundation for China’s domestic SiC substrate industry.

The progression from 2-inch to 4-inch and then 6-inch crystals may appear to be a straightforward increase in size. In reality, it reflects systematic improvements in growth equipment, thermal-field control, crystal quality, and processing technology. As SiC crystals grow larger, controlling the thermal field becomes more difficult, while internal stress becomes a more serious concern. Local temperature deviations or nonuniform growth can lead to cracking, polycrystalline nucleation, and increased defect levels. Breakthroughs in large-diameter crystal growth therefore require much more than scaling up equipment; they test the full depth of a team’s understanding of crystal-growth mechanisms and its ability to control the process.

In 2017, Chen’s team began pursuing 8-inch SiC single crystals. Building on its existing 6-inch technology, the team investigated thermal-field distribution and high-temperature vapor transport in larger crystals, redesigned its growth equipment, and continued optimizing the process to address polycrystalline nucleation during diameter expansion, raw-material transport efficiency, and crystal stress. After more than four years of iterative development, the team gradually overcame the key challenges associated with increasing crystal size and successfully grew an 8-inch SiC crystal in October 2021.

The significance of 8-inch SiC extends beyond a technical advance in materials production. It also brings the technology closer to the needs of large-scale semiconductor manufacturing. Larger wafers provide more usable surface area and, provided that process requirements and yields are met, can accommodate more chips per wafer, helping spread manufacturing costs across a greater number of devices. However, larger wafers do not automatically mean lower costs. Defect density, usable wafer area, processing losses, and downstream device yields remain critical determinants of overall economics.

China’s progress in SiC has not been driven by a single research team or company alone. As commercialization has advanced, domestic companies such as Tianke Heda and SICC have continued to develop, contributing to an increasingly mature ecosystem for SiC substrate research and manufacturing. The industry has gradually moved from early dependence on external technologies and equipment toward independent research and development, scaled production, and international competition, strengthening links between material production, wafer processing, and downstream applications.

Meanwhile, SiC research has moved beyond conventional hexagonal polytypes. Chen’s team has also expanded its work into cubic silicon carbide. Cubic SiC offers potential advantages in areas such as electron mobility and has attracted interest as a possible way to address certain interface-defect challenges encountered in hexagonal-SiC devices. However, stable growth of cubic SiC is even more difficult. Producing sufficiently large, single-polytype crystals with quality suitable for device manufacturing remains a challenging problem worldwide.

To address this challenge, the team adopted a liquid-phase growth method and proposed controlling interfacial energy to promote the formation of the desired crystal polytype. It subsequently produced single-polytype cubic SiC crystals measuring 2 to 4 inches in diameter and 4 to 10 millimeters in thickness, before advancing the crystal size to 6 inches. The team also successfully grew 8-inch p-type hexagonal SiC crystals, providing a materials foundation for further work on SiC substrates with different conductivity types and the development of high-voltage power devices. These efforts suggest that China’s SiC research is moving beyond catching up with established technologies toward independently exploring new crystal-growth pathways and methods of crystal control.

If crystal growth establishes the starting point for SiC substrates, wafer slicing directly affects material utilization and manufacturing costs. SiC is extremely hard and difficult to machine. Conventional wire sawing generates kerf loss and consumes both processing time and materials. Because substrates account for a significant portion of SiC device costs, even a partial reduction in material waste or an improvement in wafer throughput could have a meaningful impact across the entire supply chain.

This is why laser-based separation technologies are attracting attention. Unlike conventional mechanical cutting, laser-based processes precisely modify regions within the crystal to enable wafers to be separated from the ingot. The objective is to reduce material loss, improve processing efficiency, and facilitate subsequent wafer processing. As SiC crystals advance toward 8 inches and beyond, reducing slicing losses, shortening processing time, and improving wafer quality have become important factors in determining whether large-diameter substrates can be produced economically.

Westlake Instrument, a company incubated by Westlake University, is developing equipment in this area. The company has introduced laser-based separation equipment for 8-inch conductive SiC substrates and has subsequently developed automated laser-based separation technology for 12-inch SiC substrates. According to published reports, its process covers ingot thinning, laser processing, and substrate separation, with the aim of addressing the manufacturing challenges associated with slicing ultra-large crystals. A 12-inch substrate offers substantially more surface area than an 8-inch substrate. If crystal quality, processing precision, and downstream manufacturing requirements can all be met, the larger format could increase chip output per wafer and reduce the material cost allocated to each chip.

Si LAI Semiconductor is pursuing commercialization from the perspective of delivering production equipment. According to information released by the company, its equipment incorporates technologies such as combined light sources, optical-beam shaping, and surface-profile measurement. It is designed to process SiC crystals of different sizes and resistivities, and the company has reported deliveries of production equipment compatible with 12-inch substrates. It has also published figures relating to processing time, material loss, and cost improvements, stating that laser-based separation could increase wafer throughput and reduce processing losses. These figures, however, are primarily based on company disclosures. Their practical significance should be assessed in the context of processing conditions, product quality, yield, and performance in sustained mass production.

Westlake Instrument and Si LAI Semiconductor represent separate efforts in technology development and commercialization, but both are addressing the same industrial challenge. As SiC crystals become larger, increasing crystal diameter alone is not enough to create a competitive advantage. Slicing, inspection, automation, and downstream processing must advance in parallel. Only when crystal growth and processing equipment improve together can the potential area advantage of larger substrates be translated into real gains in productivity and cost efficiency.

From a broader industrial perspective, China’s SiC industry has entered a more complex stage of development. The initial priorities were to develop indigenous growth equipment, establish the ability to produce single crystals, and overcome foreign technology restrictions. Now that domestic companies have begun building substrate manufacturing capabilities, competition is increasingly focused on crystal quality, product consistency, manufacturing yield, processing costs, and customer qualification. Technical breakthroughs remain important, but a company’s ability to turn those breakthroughs into stable, reliable, and cost-competitive products is becoming a key measure of its strength.

This helps explain why the SiC industry is expanding rapidly while also facing mounting competitive pressure. Electric vehicles, solar power, energy storage, and data centers offer long-term demand potential, but growing demand does not guarantee attractive returns for every producer. As companies increase investment and build new production lines, some segments may face supply-demand mismatches, falling product prices, and insufficient capacity utilization. For substrate manufacturers, moving to larger wafer sizes is not necessarily better at any cost. If defect control, processing yield, and customer qualification fail to keep pace with the transition to larger crystals, new capacity may not translate into effective market supply.

At the same time, domestic self-sufficiency in SiC cannot be assessed by looking at substrates alone. The complete supply chain includes crystal-growth equipment, substrate processing, epitaxial growth, device design, wafer fabrication, packaging and testing, and end-use applications. Substrates are an important technical and cost component, but they are not the only factor determining device performance. Even when a material offers strong electrical and thermal properties, those advantages must be translated into device performance through epitaxy, process design, and manufacturing. Reliability validation is also essential before devices can enter automotive and industrial markets, where safety and long-term stability are critical.

In this process, Chinese companies must continue to close the gap with international leaders while developing competitive strategies suited to their own strengths. For substrate manufacturers, consistently improving crystal quality, reducing defect density, and increasing usable wafer output offer greater industrial value than pursuing diameter records alone. For equipment makers, new processes such as laser-based separation must prove that they can operate reliably over extended periods, accommodate different crystal specifications, and integrate with customers’ existing production lines. For downstream device manufacturers, stable material supply, manageable manufacturing costs, and long-term reliability are key factors in purchasing decisions and large-scale adoption.

From 2-inch to 8-inch crystals, and now toward 12 inches and beyond, China’s SiC journey has been about much more than increasing crystal diameter. It has involved a comprehensive effort spanning fundamental research, indigenous equipment development, crystal growth, substrate processing, and commercialization. More than two decades of work by Chen’s team have demonstrated that Chinese researchers can build independent materials-growth capabilities from a starting point with little accumulated experience or technological infrastructure. The development of companies such as Tianke Heda and SICC, alongside the laser-processing equipment efforts of Westlake Instrument and Silicon Lai Semiconductor, shows how China’s domestic industry is working to turn research achievements into manufacturing capabilities.

The next major hurdle for China’s SiC industry is no longer simply whether it can grow larger crystals. The challenge is to maintain consistently high quality at larger diameters, further reduce substrate manufacturing and processing costs, and build stronger coordination among materials, equipment, devices, and end-use applications. There is still a considerable distance to cover between technological leadership, stable mass production, and sustainable commercial returns.

Source: lab westlake, iicieexpo, iphy, xinhua

China Enacts New Law to Strengthen National Unity and Ethnic Solidarity

Tendenzblick
-
0
China Enacts New Law to Strengthen National Unity and Ethnic Solidarity

On the morning of June 24, 2026, China’s State Council Information Office held a press conference to introduce the legislative process of the Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress and the relevant information regarding China’s ethnic affairs.

Ethnic unity is an important foundation for the development of China’s multi-ethnic society. To further clarify the basic principles, responsibilities of all parties, and codes of conduct in ethnic affairs, the state enacted the Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress. This law was adopted by a vote at the Fourth Session of the 14th National People’s Congress in 2026 and promulgated by Presidential Order signed by President Xi Jinping.

Bayanqolu, Chairman of the Ethnic Affairs Committee of the National People’s Congress and a member of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, introduced that the legislative work on this law began in November 2023 and lasted more than two years. During this period, the legislative working group conducted research in 15 provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities directly under the Central Government, reviewed more than 1,400 relevant policy documents, laws, and regulations, carried out 19 special studies on key issues, and referred to legislation in relevant fields from 46 countries. The draft law also solicited opinions from relevant departments, deputies to the National People’s Congress, and the general public on multiple occasions. It was made available for public comment twice, receiving suggestions from nearly 50,000 person-times.

In terms of its content, the law addresses the basic principles, responsibilities of various entities, codes of conduct, and relevant legal liabilities concerning the cause of ethnic unity and progress, focusing on shared cultural identity among all ethnic groups, their daily interactions, and economic and social development. It provides a clear legal basis for handling ethnic affairs. The law also incorporates General Secretary Xi Jinping’s important thoughts on strengthening and improving ethnic work and provides legal interpretations of core concepts such as forging a strong sense of community for the Chinese nation.

Bayanqolu stated that this law has a preamble, making it the first law in more than 30 years to include one. The preamble explains the legislative background and basic principles, while the main body sets out provisions on specific matters. By incorporating relevant requirements into legal provisions, the law further clarifies the responsibilities and codes of conduct of all parties involved in ethnic work and provides a legal basis for protecting the legitimate rights and interests of people of all ethnic groups.

What important theoretical and practical achievements has the Party’s ethnic work made in the new era, and how are these achievements reflected in the Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress?

The most important theoretical innovation achieved in the Party’s ethnic work in the new era is the formation of General Secretary Xi Jinping’s important thoughts on strengthening and improving ethnic work, which are concentrated in the “Twelve Musts.” These systematically answer fundamental questions concerning the direction and path of ethnic work in the new era and provide theoretical guidance and a practical basis for ethnic work.

Under the guidance of these thoughts, China’s ethnic work has made new progress. From 2012 to 2025, the gross regional product of the five autonomous regions increased from 3.25 trillion yuan to 8.66 trillion yuan. The number of ethnic minority migrants exceeded 33 million, and more than one-third of the ethnic minority population lived in cities and areas where different ethnic groups live intermixed. Exchanges, interactions, and integration among all ethnic groups have continued to deepen.

The Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress translates these important thoughts into legal provisions and incorporates them throughout the preamble, general provisions, and various chapters. It establishes institutional arrangements in areas including forging a strong sense of community for the Chinese nation, promoting exchanges, interactions, and integration among all ethnic groups, and advancing common prosperity and development. It thus provides the rule-of-law safeguards for the cause of ethnic unity and progress.

What progress has China made in building its legal system concerning ethnic affairs? What is the position of the Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress within this system, and how is it related to and different from the Law on Regional Ethnic Autonomy?

China’s system of laws and regulations concerning ethnic affairs is centered on the Constitution. Since the founding of the People’s Republic of China, the Constitution has continuously improved its provisions on ethnic equality, ethnic unity, regional ethnic autonomy, and the common development of all ethnic groups. The Law on Regional Ethnic Autonomy, enacted in 1984, further clarified the specific contents of the system of regional ethnic autonomy. In 2018, the term “Chinese nation” was included in the Constitution for the first time, providing a fundamental legal basis for ethnic work in the new era.

In recent years, China has continued to improve legislation concerning ethnic affairs. In addition to the Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress, more than ten other laws, including the Organic Law of Local People’s Congresses and Local People’s Governments, the Law on Deputies to the National People’s Congress and to Local People’s Congresses at Various Levels, the Legislation Law, the Patriotic Education Law, and the Law on Publicity and Education on the Rule of Law, contain relevant provisions on forging a strong sense of community for the Chinese nation. Various localities have also enacted local regulations to promote ethnic unity and progress. Together, these constitute the system of legal norms governing ethnic affairs.

The Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress is a fundamental law for implementing relevant constitutional provisions in the new era, handling ethnic affairs, and carrying out ethnic work. It was deliberated and adopted by the National People’s Congress and systematically regulates ethnic relations and the cause of ethnic unity and progress nationwide, providing a fundamental legal basis for related work.

The Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress and the Law on Regional Ethnic Autonomy are both important laws concerning ethnic affairs, but they focus on different aspects. The former focuses on ethnic relations and the cause of ethnic unity and progress nationwide, while the latter primarily regulates the system of regional ethnic autonomy, autonomous powers, and the relationship between ethnic autonomous areas and the central government. The two laws complement each other and jointly form the rule-of-law foundation for the governance of ethnic affairs in China.

After the Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress comes into effect, what specific measures will the National Ethnic Affairs Commission take to achieve practical results in building a shared spiritual homeland for all ethnic groups, promoting exchanges, interactions, and integration, and advancing common prosperity and development?

The National Ethnic Affairs Commission is working with relevant departments to formulate the 15th Five-Year Plan for ethnic unity and progress. In accordance with the Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress, it will advance related work in three areas: building a shared spiritual homeland for all ethnic groups, promoting exchanges, interactions, and integration among all ethnic groups, and advancing their common prosperity and development.

In terms of cultural development, efforts will be made to strengthen patriotic education and historical and cultural education for young people, promote the popularization of the national common language and writing system, and enhance the identification of people of all ethnic groups with Chinese culture.

To promote exchanges among all ethnic groups, efforts will be made to deepen initiatives to foster ethnic unity and progress, promote the integration of culture and tourism, advance the development of communities where people of different ethnic groups live intermixed, and help new urban residents from ethnic minority areas better integrate into urban life through relevant initiatives. These efforts will create conditions for people of all ethnic groups to study, work, and live together.

To promote common development, regional support policies will be improved, the initiative to promote prosperity in border areas and improve the lives of their residents will be deepened, and industries with distinctive local advantages and livelihood projects will be developed. These efforts will promote high-quality development in ethnic minority areas and continuously improve people’s lives.

In addition, after five years of compilation, the National Ethnic Affairs Commission has completed A History of Exchanges, Interactions, and Integration among the Chinese Nation. The work consists of 11 volumes and more than 4.2 million Chinese characters and is scheduled for publication in the near future. It systematically reviews the development of the Chinese nation and provides new foundational materials for related historical research.

What specific measures will the Ministry of Justice take to conduct public legal education on the Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress?

The Ministry of Justice will carry out public legal education on the Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress in three areas.

First, it will implement the system of responsibility for public legal education, promote the integration of publicity about the law into the entire process of legislation, law enforcement, judicial proceedings, and legal services, and release authoritative interpretations through media platforms.

Second, it will conduct themed publicity campaigns. In conjunction with activities such as Constitution Publicity Week and Ethnic Unity and Progress Publicity Week, it will organize volunteer legal educators to visit communities, villages, and schools to publicize relevant laws and regulations, while promoting the integration of rule-of-law culture with ethnic cultures.

Third, it will improve the effectiveness of public legal education by incorporating the relevant law into legal studies for leading officials and rule-of-law education for young people. In conjunction with initiatives to establish model grassroots units, it will also integrate legal publicity with grassroots governance in accordance with the law, thereby promoting exchanges, interactions, and integration among all ethnic groups.

How should we view claims by some Western media outlets linking the promotion of exchanges, interactions, and integration among all ethnic groups with issues such as “forced labor”? What legal measures will China take to protect the legitimate rights and interests of workers of all ethnic groups who seek employment or start businesses across regions?

Article 25 of the Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress explicitly protects the legitimate rights and interests of citizens who seek employment or start businesses across regions. It emphasizes that employment must be based on the principles of voluntary choice, compliance with the law, and freedom to come and go. The aim is to broaden employment channels and promote exchanges, interactions, and integration among all ethnic groups.

Relevant laws prohibit forced labor, employment discrimination, and restrictions on personal freedom. They also protect the legitimate rights and interests of workers of all ethnic groups through measures such as labor rights protection and legal aid. In response to external claims of “forced labor” and “forced displacement” in Xinjiang, relevant responses emphasize that the transfer of labor for employment in Xinjiang is based on individual willingness and aims to increase employment opportunities, raise incomes, and improve skills.

Over the past five years, Xinjiang has recorded a cumulative increase of 2.392 million urban jobs, while agricultural workers have undertaken 16.1 million person-times of work outside their home areas. The annual average growth rates of per capita disposable income for urban and rural residents were 5.3% and 8.1%, respectively. These measures aim to expand employment while protecting workers’ legitimate rights and interests.

Why does the Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress emphasize promoting the popularization of the national common language and writing system? How will it also protect the rights of all ethnic groups to use and develop their own languages and writing systems?

Language is an important tool for communication, and a shared language helps promote understanding and interaction. There are more than 200 countries and regions, over 2,500 ethnic groups, and more than 7,000 languages around the world. Promoting a common language and writing system is a fundamental task in national development in many countries. At present, more than 100 sovereign states have established the status of a common or official language through their constitutions or other laws. China’s Constitution explicitly stipulates that the state promotes the nationwide use of Putonghua, or Standard Chinese. In December 2025, the Law on the Standard Spoken and Written Chinese Language completed its latest revision, further providing legal safeguards for related work.

Promoting the popularization of the national common language and writing system helps improve the scientific and cultural literacy of people of all ethnic groups, promotes their common development and shared progress toward modernization, and helps forge a strong sense of community for the Chinese nation. Article 15 of the Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress explicitly stipulates that the state comprehensively promotes the popularization of the national common language and writing system. No organization or individual may obstruct citizens from learning or using the national common language and writing system. The law also establishes provisions on the use of the national common language and writing system in school education, official activities, and public places.

At the same time, promoting the national common language and writing system does not conflict with protecting ethnic minorities’ rights to learn and use their own languages and writing systems. The Constitution and the Law on the Standard Spoken and Written Chinese Language explicitly protect the freedom of all ethnic groups to use and develop their own languages and writing systems. The Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress also stipulates that the state respects and protects ethnic minorities’ rights to learn and use their own languages and writing systems, supports their standardization and development in the fields of standards and information technology, and encourages all ethnic groups to learn one another’s languages and writing systems.

In practice, these rights are also protected. There are 442 ethnic minority deputies to the National People’s Congress, accounting for 14.85% of the total number of deputies. Through measures such as providing documents in ethnic minority language versions, meetings of the National People’s Congress ensure that ethnic minority deputies can perform their duties using languages and writing systems with which they are familiar. For example, during the deliberation of the draft Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress at the National People’s Congress, versions in seven ethnic minority languages and writing systems were provided: Mongolian, Tibetan, Uyghur, Kazakh, Korean, Yi, and Zhuang.

Promoting the popularization of the national common language and writing system and protecting the rights of ethnic minorities to use their own languages and writing systems are both requirements explicitly stipulated in the Constitution and the law. They are not in opposition to each other.

How should we view claims by some overseas organizations that interpret the Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress as an attempt to “assimilate ethnic minorities” and call for human rights sanctions against China?

Enacting the Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress reflects the common aspirations of people of all ethnic groups across the country. Since the beginning of the new era, deputies to the National People’s Congress have submitted a cumulative total of 700 proposals and suggestions related to this issue. After the law was passed, it received recognition and support from people of all ethnic groups across the country, as well as positive assessments from friendly individuals, media outlets, and institutions in many countries. China firmly opposes statements by certain overseas organizations that disregard the development achievements of China’s ethnic minority areas and make unfounded accusations against China’s ethnic policies and rule-of-law development.

China has always attached great importance to ethnic unity and the development of ethnic minority areas, promoting equality, unity, common progress, and development among all ethnic groups. During the campaign to eradicate poverty, all 420 impoverished counties in ethnic autonomous areas, all five autonomous regions, and all 31.21 million impoverished people in Guizhou, Yunnan, and Qinghai were lifted out of poverty as scheduled. All ethnic groups worked together to build a moderately prosperous society in all respects. Infrastructure and public services in ethnic minority areas, including education, healthcare, transportation, water and electricity supplies, and information networks, have continued to improve.

In terms of cultural preservation, the state has continued to invest funds in protecting cultural heritage sites such as the Potala Palace, the Jokhang Temple, and Norbulingka; translating, organizing, and publishing ancient works such as Kutadgu Bilig and the Compendium of the Turkic Dialects; and carrying out emergency protection and restoration of more than 3,000 precious cultural relics. Of the 45 Chinese projects inscribed on UNESCO’s Lists of Intangible Cultural Heritage, more than one-third are related to ethnic minority cultures.

The Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress incorporates the practical experience and relevant institutional measures of the cause of ethnic unity and progress in the new era into the rule-of-law framework. It clarifies overall requirements and key tasks and provides legal support for safeguarding equality, unity, common development, and progress among all ethnic groups. This law represents a legal summary of the practical experience of addressing ethnic issues with Chinese characteristics.

China will continue to unswervingly follow the correct path for addressing ethnic issues with Chinese characteristics, promote all ethnic groups in working together in unity and striving for common prosperity and development, and pool strength for building a strong country and advancing national rejuvenation through Chinese modernization. China will also provide a reference for other countries around the world in addressing ethnic issues.

How should we respond to foreign media outlets that interpret the provisions on extraterritorial application in the Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress as “extraterritorial jurisdiction” or “long-arm jurisdiction”?

Article 63 of the Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress stipulates that organizations and individuals outside the territory of the People’s Republic of China that engage in acts undermining ethnic unity and progress or fomenting ethnic separatism shall be held legally liable in accordance with the law. In response to certain Western media outlets’ distorted interpretations of this provision as “extraterritorial jurisdiction” or “long-arm jurisdiction,” relevant responses emphasize that the provision is consistent with the basic principles of international law and with the legislative practices of various countries in safeguarding national security and social order.

Safeguarding national unity, territorial integrity, and social stability is an important responsibility of sovereign states. Article 63 aims to prevent and punish, in accordance with the law, unlawful acts that undermine ethnic unity or foment ethnic separatism, thereby safeguarding ethnic harmony, social stability, and national security.

Ethnic unity is an important foundation for national prosperity and development and serves the common interests of people of all ethnic groups. In the face of unlawful activities that incite ethnic tensions, undermine ethnic unity, or endanger national security, the law provides an institutional basis for pursuing legal liability and further clarifies that the cause of ethnic unity and progress shall not be subject to interference by external forces.

This provision is consistent with the principles of jurisdiction established by China’s relevant laws. The pursuit of legal liability for relevant acts will be carried out in accordance with the law and regulations, prudently and in a standardized manner, safeguarding national sovereignty, security, and development interests, as well as the legitimate rights and interests of people of all ethnic groups. At the same time, it will not affect normal cultural and people-to-people exchanges, academic discussions, or economic and trade cooperation.

How should we view claims by some foreign media outlets linking boarding schools in Tibet with “forced assimilation” and “human rights violations”? What are the reasons for establishing boarding schools in Tibet, what results have they achieved, and how will the Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress protect the right to education of people of all ethnic groups?

Foreign media reports concerning boarding schools in Tibet do not correspond to the facts.

First, boarding schools reflect educational equity and ethnic equality. China’s Compulsory Education Law stipulates that boarding schools are intended to ensure that school-age children living in scattered settlements can receive compulsory education, and these schools serve children of all ethnic groups.

Second, boarding schools do not mean closed management or military-style administration. Whether students live at school is a voluntary choice made by students and their parents. Students can return home on weekends, public holidays, and during winter and summer vacations, and parents may visit them or take them home at any time.

Third, boarding schools respond to the actual needs of farmers and herders in Tibet. Tibet has a vast territory and a widely dispersed population. Boarding schools can reduce the costs of attending school and provide students with more convenient educational conditions.

In old Tibet, education was extremely underdeveloped. The enrollment rate of school-age children was less than 2%, and more than 95% of the population was illiterate. By 2024, the enrollment rate of school-age children in Tibet had reached 99.98%, and the retention rate in compulsory education had reached 96.94%.

Some countries once forced Indigenous children to attend boarding schools and suppressed their cultural identity. This is fundamentally different from China’s boarding school system. In addition, the Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress contains provisions on language education, the use of teaching materials, student exchanges, and public services, further safeguarding the equal right to education of all ethnic groups.

Source: people, xinhua, china daily, sohu

AI for Capital, or AI for Society?

Tendenzblick
-
0
AI for Capital, or AI for Society?

Artificial intelligence is entering human society at an unprecedented pace. From factory floors and office desks to hospitals, schools, and everyday life, AI is becoming a foundational force in the production of knowledge, the distribution of wealth, and the organization of social relations. Public debate oscillates between hope and fear. Some anticipate a leap in productivity that will free humanity from repetitive and exhausting labor. Others warn that machines will displace workers, concentrate wealth, and ultimately undermine the social structures on which human life depends.

Both perspectives reflect genuine possibilities, yet they share a common assumption: that artificial intelligence is an autonomous force whose technological capabilities will determine the future of society. But technology has never developed in a vacuum. Who finances it, who owns it, who controls it, and whose needs it is designed to serve are not peripheral questions. They shape how technology enters society and determine who benefits from its advances, who bears its costs, and whose lives are transformed in the process.

The fundamental question, therefore, is not simply what kind of future AI will create, but who has the power to decide what that future looks like.

Every major technological transformation in modern history has contained two distinct possibilities: the expansion of human capabilities and the reorganization of power between people. The steam engine increased productive capacity without automatically eliminating workers’ poverty. Electrification and assembly-line production enabled mass manufacturing while often making labor more standardized and tightly controlled. The internet lowered barriers to communication and knowledge sharing, yet also facilitated the emergence of powerful digital platforms capable of monopolizing markets, information, and public attention. Technology expands what society can do, but it does not determine how those possibilities will be realized, nor does it guarantee that their benefits will be shared.

Artificial intelligence is no exception. It can accelerate scientific discovery, widen access to knowledge, improve medical services, and help people accomplish tasks that were previously beyond their individual capabilities. Yet the social consequences of these advances depend on the institutional and economic arrangements into which they are introduced. The same AI system might help a doctor spend less time completing paperwork and more time caring for patients. It might equally become a justification for reducing medical staff and increasing workloads. In education, AI could help teachers understand individual students’ needs, or it could be used to standardize assessment and reduce the complexity of learning to a set of measurable indicators. Technological capabilities alone cannot determine which path society takes. Those choices are made by people and institutions operating within particular structures of power and interest.

This is why the current AI boom must be understood within a broader political and economic context. Capital flows into artificial intelligence not only because the technology has genuine innovative potential, but also because it embodies enormous expectations of future growth. Under competitive pressure, companies must continually present compelling visions of the future to attract investment, sustain valuations, and secure market dominance. Model size, computing capacity, and user growth consequently become more than measures of technical progress: they become financial narratives through which uncertain future returns are translated into present economic value.

This does not mean that private investment inevitably produces a speculative bubble. Large-scale investment can sustain long-term research, build essential infrastructure, and support innovations whose benefits may take years to emerge. Many important technological advances would have been impossible without commercial enterprise. 

The problem arises when expectations of future profitability become detached from demonstrable social value, and when companies must continually expand simply to justify their valuations. Under these conditions, technological competition can gradually drift away from concrete human needs. Vast resources may flow toward ever-larger and more expensive models, while persistent problems in education, healthcare, housing, and public services receive comparatively less attention because their returns are less immediate or less easily captured by private investors.

Here lies a central contradiction of the AI economy: the capacity to generate wealth is not the same as the capacity to distribute it. Higher productivity does not automatically translate into higher wages, just as lower production costs do not necessarily result in better services for ordinary people. If the gains from technological progress accrue primarily to corporations, shareholders, and those who already possess bargaining power, society may become more productive without becoming more prosperous in any broadly shared sense. The question is not merely how much wealth AI can create, but who will have the power to claim it.

The future of work illustrates this tension particularly clearly. It is misleading to frame AI as a simple contest between human workers and machines. Technology can eliminate certain jobs, create new occupations, transform existing tasks, and strengthen workers’ capabilities at the same time. The more consequential questions are whether workers can participate meaningfully in the transition, whether they can share in the gains from increased productivity, and whether they will retain the ability to secure dignified livelihoods and negotiate the conditions of their employment.

When businesses approach automation primarily as a means of reducing labor costs and weakening their dependence on workers, technological progress can be accompanied by declining job security, the erosion of skills, and increasingly intensive forms of management. Even when jobs are not eliminated, algorithmic systems can reorganize work through granular performance metrics, continuous monitoring, and automated task allocation. Workers may no longer receive every instruction directly from a human supervisor, yet find themselves increasingly dependent on algorithmic scores, rankings, and recommendations. A workplace can become more intelligent without becoming more humane.

Nor is the intelligence displayed by AI entirely detached from human labor. Behind seemingly autonomous systems lie countless tasks involving data preparation, content annotation, safety moderation, infrastructure maintenance, and other forms of work that remain largely invisible to end users. Beyond the digital interface are mines, semiconductor factories, data centers, power grids, and global supply chains. The apparent immateriality of AI rests on a substantial physical foundation. Some labor is concealed behind the polished image of intelligent products, while some environmental and social costs are transferred to other communities. The more seamless and automated a technology appears, the more important it becomes to ask who performs the work that sustains it, where its resources originate, and who bears the consequences of its material footprint.

These questions lead directly to the problem of global inequality. Advanced AI depends on highly concentrated resources, including capital, computing infrastructure, semiconductors, and specialized expertise. These resources are unevenly distributed across countries and regions. Those who control critical infrastructure can consequently exercise disproportionate influence over technical standards, commercial rules, and the international governance of AI. Meanwhile, the natural resources, data, and labor contributed by countries in the Global South may help generate technological value without ensuring that those societies share proportionately in its benefits. When AI is increasingly treated as an instrument of national competition, the space for international cooperation can narrow further.

None of this means that AI is inherently destined to reproduce existing structures of domination. The significance of these problems lies precisely in the fact that current arrangements are not inevitable. Technological infrastructure can be organized under different ownership models. Knowledge can be shared through different institutional arrangements. Public institutions can support research and applications guided by social needs rather than commercial returns alone. The trajectory of technological development is not a predetermined destiny; it emerges from countless economic decisions, institutional choices, and collective actions.

We must therefore reconsider what it means for AI to serve the public interest. Public value does not require every technological system to be developed directly by the state, nor does it demand the exclusion of commercial innovation. It means that technologies profoundly affecting the basic conditions of social life cannot be evaluated solely through market prices and investment returns. AI in education should support human development rather than merely improve administrative efficiency. AI in healthcare should improve patients’ lives rather than further marginalize those who cannot generate sufficient profit. AI in the workplace should reduce unnecessary drudgery rather than transform every minute saved into an opportunity to impose higher performance targets.

Achieving these goals requires us to move beyond technical regulation and address the distribution of wealth, labor protections, public services, and democratic participation. Rules governing corporate conduct may be necessary, but they cannot by themselves transform the distribution of technological gains. Ethical principles are equally important, yet they cannot substitute for changes in the actual relationships through which power is exercised. Workers need a meaningful voice in technological decisions that reshape their employment. People should be able to understand and challenge automated decisions that affect their rights. Public institutions need sufficient technological capacity to avoid complete dependence on a small number of commercial providers. Open-source development, public research, and international collaboration also deserve stronger institutional support, so that essential knowledge does not become entirely enclosed within the proprietary assets of a few organizations.

None of these approaches is a universal solution. Governments may lack technical expertise, and public institutions can be vulnerable to bureaucracy, conflicts of interest, and abuses of power. Open-source development can broaden participation without eliminating inequalities in computing resources. Market competition can encourage innovation without necessarily protecting fundamental rights. The challenge, therefore, is not simply to choose between the state and the market, but to establish institutions capable of limiting concentrated power, protecting rights, accommodating diverse needs, and remaining accountable to the public. Whether AI is controlled by corporations, governments, or other organizations, the same question should apply: does it give the people affected by it greater opportunities to understand, influence, and challenge the decisions that shape their lives?

This is also where a humanistic perspective becomes indispensable. We habitually measure technological progress through speed, scale, accuracy, and productivity, but rarely ask how much efficiency society actually needs, or what that efficiency should enable us to achieve. Human worth cannot be reduced to the speed at which tasks are completed. Education is more than the transmission of information; healthcare is more than the identification of disease; social life is more than a collection of processes awaiting optimization. Companionship, trust, dignity, creativity, and mutual understanding are difficult to quantify, yet they constitute much of what makes life meaningful.

If AI can take over more repetitive work, will people gain more genuine freedom over their time? If machines can generate greater wealth, will people enjoy greater security, or will they remain trapped in constant competition and fear of becoming economically redundant? If access to knowledge becomes easier, will our capacity for independent judgment deepen, or will we gradually outsource the act of thinking itself? These questions cannot be answered by technological development alone. They concern the kind of society we wish to build and the meaning we attach to human freedom.

We need not reject artificial intelligence because capital seeks profit, nor should we assume that its extraordinary potential will automatically benefit everyone. A more mature response requires us to recognize both the possibilities technology creates and the ways in which economic interests can shape those possibilities. Openness to innovation is entirely compatible with skepticism toward concentrated power. Supporting technological progress does not require abandoning the pursuit of fairness, dignity, or public accountability.

Ultimately, AI for capital and AI for society are not two fundamentally different technologies. They represent different social relationships through which the same technology can develop. In one, intelligence is primarily treated as an instrument of accumulation, while people become costs to be minimized, data to be extracted, or markets to be captured. In the other, technological development is subject to broader public deliberation, efficiency serves human flourishing, and the gains of innovation become accessible to a wider share of society. The distinction lies not simply in corporate philosophy, but in labor institutions, public policy, ownership structures, and the actual capacity of people to participate in decisions affecting their lives.

We still do not know where artificial intelligence will ultimately lead humanity. But one principle deserves to remain beyond dispute: the future should not belong exclusively to technology developers, nor should it be determined solely by financial markets and their expectations of growth. It must also belong to the people who use these systems, live with their consequences, and will shape the societies in which they operate.

Technology can help us reorganize the world, but it cannot decide for us why that world is worth organizing in the first place. Genuine progress does not mean creating machines that become increasingly powerful while requiring human beings to surrender their dignity, autonomy, and capacity for care. It means building a society in which technological advancement expands the conditions for human flourishing.

The moment we begin asking who owns technology, who benefits from it, and who has the authority to determine its purposes, the debate over artificial intelligence moves beyond speculation about the future. It becomes a discussion about the choices we can make in the present, and the kind of future we are willing to build together.

Source: toda, ncbi, washington crossing advisors, theconversation

Chinese Modernization: A Historical Synthesis of Centralization and Democracy

Tendenzblick
-
0
Chinese Modernization: A Historical Synthesis of Centralization and Democracy

The concept of “modernization” emerged in the post-Second World War social sciences, particularly within Western discussions of “political development.” From this perspective, China’s search for modernization can be traced back to the Self-Strengthening Movement in the late Qing period. 

Subsequent efforts by different political forces likewise sought to address the fundamental question of how China could achieve national strength, independence, and social progress. Yet, viewed from the broader trajectory of China’s modern history, the founding of the People’s Republic of China in 1949 marked a decisive turning point. 

It not only transformed the country’s political order, but also shifted China’s modernization from a largely reactive response to external pressure toward a sustained project of national reconstruction and development.

To understand Chinese modernization, therefore, one must first understand the historical role of the Communist Party of China. Through a highly organized political structure, the CPC mobilized and organized society, linking national independence, state-building, economic development, and the liberation and well-being of the people. In this process, it gradually developed a distinctive path of modernization centered on the people. This historical trajectory also resonates with Mao Zedong’s vision in “On New Democracy” of a “new China” and an “advanced civilization” founded upon new political, economic, and social institutions.

The “new” represents the transformation and renewal of historical traditions under modern conditions. Chinese modernization did not emerge in a cultural vacuum. It developed through a long process in which Marxism encountered, interacted with, and was transformed by China’s historical civilization. In this sense, the modernization of China is not merely a process of institutional change or economic development. It is also a process through which an ancient civilization has sought to renew itself under modern conditions.

This is why the key to understanding Chinese modernization lies in understanding the relationship between the Communist Party of China and Chinese civilization. The CPC is, first and foremost, a Marxist political party. At the same time, it is deeply embedded in the historical and cultural traditions of China. These two dimensions are not necessarily contradictory. Rather, they have interacted to shape the political character and historical practice of the Party. Marxism provided the CPC with a distinctive political outlook and revolutionary orientation, while Chinese civilization provided a historical and cultural environment in which Marxism could take root and develop.

The CPC was therefore not an ideological force transplanted onto Chinese society from outside. Marxism, after entering China, underwent a profound process of localization and transformation. It encountered a civilization with a long tradition of state-building, political organization, moral education, public responsibility, and concern for the people. The resulting synthesis created conditions under which Marxist political ideas could acquire new institutional and cultural forms.

This historical process is particularly important for understanding what contemporary Chinese political discourse calls the “second integration”: the integration of the basic tenets of Marxism with China’s fine traditional culture. The significance of this proposition lies not simply in identifying similarities between Marxism and traditional Chinese thought. More fundamentally, it points to the interaction between two political civilizations and to the ways in which historical traditions can be transformed through modern political practice.

From this perspective, historical political science provides a useful methodological approach. Institutions do not emerge in isolation from history, nor do political organizations exist independently of cultural traditions. To understand China’s political development, it is necessary to examine the interaction among institutions, political organizations, ideas, and long-term historical structures. Such an approach makes it possible to understand Chinese modernization not simply as an imitation of Western modernization, but as a distinctive historical process shaped by the encounter between Marxism and Chinese civilization.

One of the most enduring features of Chinese political civilization is the idea of Great Unity, or datong. This concept refers not only to territorial unity, but also to institutional integration, cultural cohesion, and a shared political identity. Since the formation of early Chinese states, the maintenance of political unity has been a central concern of Chinese history. The development of centralized state institutions gave China an unusually strong capacity for political organization and integration over long periods of history.

The nineteenth century, however, brought an unprecedented crisis. China faced military defeat, foreign intervention, internal disorder, and the erosion of its traditional political institutions. The problem was no longer simply how to preserve an existing political order, but how to reconstruct a unified state under radically changed historical circumstances.

The fall of the imperial system after the 1911 Revolution created a political vacuum. China experimented with constitutional government and republican institutions, but these efforts failed to produce a stable national political order. Political fragmentation and warlordism followed. Sun Yat-sen and others attempted to use political parties as instruments of national reconstruction, but factionalism within the Nationalist Party ultimately limited its ability to provide a durable basis for political integration.

The rise of the Communist Party of China represented a different solution to the problem of state organization. Through a highly disciplined and centralized organizational structure, the Party mobilized diverse social forces and ultimately rebuilt a unified political order. In this process, the historical tradition of national unity acquired a new institutional foundation.

This transformation is significant because the political foundation of the new order differed fundamentally from that of the imperial system. Under the traditional monarchy, political authority was ultimately embedded in dynastic rule. In the modern political order established after 1949, political authority was organized around a modern party-state structure. The institutional bearer of national unity was no longer a ruling dynasty, but a highly organized political party operating within a modern state system.

The distinctive political character of the CPC is therefore central to understanding this transformation. Marx and Engels famously argued in The Communist Manifesto that communists do not pursue interests separate from those of the working class and ultimately seek the emancipation of humanity. In China, this principle became connected with the broader political objective of serving the people and transforming society.

A political organization that defines itself through a public mission, rather than through the pursuit of a private or dynastic interest, requires a high degree of organization if it is to translate its political objectives into sustained governing capacity. Lenin’s principle of democratic centralism provided an important organizational foundation for Marxist parties. The CPC incorporated this principle into its own institutional development and subsequently adapted it to China’s political and historical circumstances.

Democratic centralism also became an important principle of China’s state institutions. The Constitution of the People’s Republic of China stipulates that state institutions operate according to the principle of democratic centralism. In practice, this principle seeks to combine broad participation and consultation with unified decision-making and implementation. One of its most familiar political expressions is the principle of “from the masses, to the masses.”

This principle points to a distinctive understanding of the political process. Modern states must aggregate diverse interests and social demands, transform them into public policy, implement those policies, and then evaluate and adjust them through practice. The Chinese political system has sought to accomplish this through an extensive organizational network connecting the Party, the state, and society.

Another important feature of China’s historical political civilization is the tradition of selecting capable people for public office. From the rise of the scholar-official class in the pre-Qin period through the development of Confucian statecraft during the imperial era, political governance became closely connected with education, knowledge, moral cultivation, and the recruitment of officials.

The emergence of the scholar-official system represented an important historical feature of Chinese political civilization: the relative integration of political authority and cultural authority. Rather than relying primarily on hereditary aristocracy, military power, or private wealth, the traditional Chinese state increasingly relied upon educated officials selected through institutionalized mechanisms. This created a distinctive political culture in which governing competence and moral responsibility were closely associated with public office.

Modern China did not simply reproduce this tradition. Instead, elements of the traditional ideal of selecting capable public servants were transformed within a Marxist political and organizational framework. The contemporary cadre system emerged partly from the organizational traditions of Marxist parties, but it also developed within China’s own historical environment.

This transformation can be seen particularly clearly in the concept of party spirit. In the Marxist tradition, party spirit emphasizes political commitment, organizational discipline, and collective responsibility. At the same time, its development in China has interacted with older cultural ideas concerning moral cultivation, public responsibility, and the obligation of those who govern to serve society. In this sense, the modern political cadre differs fundamentally from the traditional scholar-official, but the two are connected by a longer historical concern with the selection, education, and cultivation of governing elites.

The modern system of selecting and promoting officials also differs from traditional meritocratic practices in an important respect. Traditional meritocracy ultimately operated within a monarchical political order and served dynastic rule. Modern cadre selection, by contrast, is embedded in a political system whose stated legitimacy is grounded in the interests and participation of the people. Marxism therefore changed the normative foundation of the traditional ideal of selecting capable rulers, while organizational institutions strengthened its capacity for systematic implementation.

If the tradition of Great Unity concerns the organization and integrity of the state, the tradition of minben, or “people as the foundation,” concerns the relationship between political authority and society.

Concern for the people is one of the most enduring themes in Chinese political thought. From the ancient idea that “the people are the foundation of the state” to the later Confucian proposition that the people should be regarded as fundamental to political rule, Chinese political civilization developed a strong tradition of emphasizing the responsibilities of rulers toward the population.

Yet traditional minben thought also had a fundamental limitation. The people were recognized as important, but they remained largely objects of political governance. They were to be protected, cared for, and treated as the foundation of political order, but they were not yet conceived as autonomous political subjects in the modern sense.

One of the most important transformations brought about by modern Chinese political development was therefore the change in the political status of the people. Marxist historical materialism emphasizes that the people are the makers of history. When this proposition encountered the Chinese tradition of minben, it provided the basis for a new understanding of the political role of the people.

The Communist Party’s mass line became one of the principal mechanisms through which this transformation took place. Its basic principle—“from the masses, to the masses”—requires political organizations to engage with society, understand the needs and experiences of ordinary people, transform dispersed social demands into policies, and then return those policies to society for implementation and evaluation.

The mass line is therefore more than a method of political communication. It represents a particular conception of the political process. Social demands are gathered and organized; policies are formulated; implementation generates new experiences; and these experiences are then used to revise subsequent decisions. In this sense, the mass line has functioned both as a method of political leadership and, increasingly, as a mechanism of governance.

Since the reform and opening-up period, a variety of experiments in grassroots consultation and participation have emerged across China. Practices such as the democratic consultation meetings developed in Wenling, Zhejiang, illustrate attempts to institutionalize public participation in local decision-making. These experiments differ in form and scope, but they share an emphasis on connecting public participation with concrete processes of governance.

It is within this longer historical trajectory that the contemporary concept of “whole-process people’s democracy” can be understood. Democracy is not limited to elections or a single moment of political choice. It also involves agenda-setting, consultation, decision-making, implementation, supervision, and feedback. The emphasis on the political process is therefore particularly important.

The mass line provides one institutional and political mechanism linking traditional minben thought with modern people’s democracy. Traditional minben emphasized that the government should serve the people and regard their welfare as fundamental. Modern people’s democracy goes further by emphasizing the political agency of the people and their participation in the processes through which public decisions are made and implemented.

Seen from this perspective, Chinese modernization cannot be adequately explained through a simple opposition between “tradition” and “modernity.” Modern China represents both a break with the old political order and a continuation of important historical traditions. The transformation of the centralized state, the evolution of the tradition of selecting capable officials, and the transformation of minben thought into a modern conception of popular political participation all demonstrate how historical continuity and institutional innovation can coexist.

This helps explain why China can be understood as both an ancient and a modern country. Its civilization is ancient, but its contemporary political and institutional forms are modern. The modernization process has not required the complete abandonment of historical traditions. Instead, some elements of those traditions have been reinterpreted and incorporated into new institutional forms.

The significance of the “second integration” lies precisely in this process. The integration of Marxism with China’s fine traditional culture does not mean mechanically combining two pre-existing systems of thought. Rather, it involves transforming both the interpretation of tradition and the application of Marxism through concrete historical practice.

Chinese civilization provides Marxism with a rich reservoir of concepts, institutions, and political experiences. Marxism, in turn, provides a new theoretical framework through which elements of traditional civilization can be reinterpreted and placed within a modern political context. The result is neither a simple return to tradition nor a straightforward transplantation of Western institutional models.

Historical political science is valuable here because it allows this process to be examined over a longer time horizon. Political institutions are shaped by historical experience, and political organizations operate within cultural environments that precede them. Understanding Chinese modernization therefore requires attention not only to formal institutions, but also to the historical structures, political practices, and cultural traditions that influence how those institutions operate.

From the perspective of political theory, Chinese modernization also raises a broader question: must modernity necessarily take a single institutional form? China’s historical experience suggests otherwise. A country with a long tradition of political unity and civilizational continuity can enter modernity while retaining and transforming elements of its historical political culture.

Traditional China was, in many respects, a civilization-state sustained by institutions of administration, education, and cultural integration. Contemporary China has developed a modern state system under the leadership of the Communist Party of China. There is both rupture and continuity between these two historical forms. The transformation of the old order did not erase the historical foundations of Chinese political civilization; rather, some of those foundations were reconfigured within a new institutional framework.

Chinese modernization should therefore be understood not simply as economic development, technological progress, or social transformation. It is also a process of political and civilizational transformation. It has inherited historical ideas concerning national unity, the selection of capable public officials, concern for the people, and public responsibility, while simultaneously redefining these ideas through Marxist theory and modern political institutions.

The resulting political civilization is neither a simple revival of the past nor a mechanical imitation of Western modernity. It is the product of a long historical interaction between Marxism and Chinese civilization. In this interaction, an ancient civilization has acquired new institutional forms, while Marxism has developed a distinctive Chinese expression through political practice.

This is perhaps the deeper significance of Chinese modernization. It demonstrates that modernization need not necessarily mean the disappearance of historical civilization. A civilization can enter modernity while transforming, rather than simply abandoning, its historical inheritance. The Chinese experience thus provides an important case for understanding the diversity of modernization and the possibility that different civilizations may generate different institutional and political forms in the course of becoming modern.

Source: cssn, cgtn, chinadaily, xinhua, guancha

Why China’s Autonomous Driving Revolution Is Taking the Trucking Route

Tendenzblick
-
0
Why China’s Autonomous Driving Revolution Is Taking the Trucking Route

When autonomous driving began moving from laboratories to real-world applications, China made a distinctive choice: instead of putting people in the back seat first, it put freight in the cargo bay.

Across Chinese mines, ports, logistics parks and long-haul highways, autonomous trucks are gradually becoming part of everyday industrial operations. While the United States has focused heavily on robotaxis and autonomous passenger transportation, China has placed considerable emphasis on autonomous heavy-duty trucks. The difference is not simply a matter of technological preference. It reflects the structure of the two countries’ transportation systems, industrial economies, labor markets and regulatory environments.

The logic behind China’s focus on trucks is straightforward. Autonomous driving is ultimately a commercial technology, and its long-term viability depends on whether it can create measurable economic value. Heavy-duty trucks happen to sit at the center of one of China’s largest and most cost-intensive industries: road freight.

China operates one of the world’s largest road freight networks. In 2025, road transportation accounted for 432.88 billion tons of commercial freight, representing more than 70 percent of China’s total commercial freight volume. More than 11 million commercial freight vehicles support this enormous transportation system, moving goods between factories, warehouses, ports, mines and distribution centers. The scale of the market means that even relatively small improvements in fuel consumption, vehicle utilization, driver requirements or transportation efficiency can translate into substantial economic value.

This gives autonomous trucking an advantage that passenger-car autonomy does not always possess. For a consumer vehicle, the economic value of autonomous driving can be difficult to quantify. For a freight company, the calculation is much more direct. How many kilometers does a truck travel each day? How much fuel does it consume? How many drivers are required? How much cargo can it transport? How many hours can the vehicle operate? If autonomous technology can reduce labor intensity, lower energy consumption and increase vehicle utilization, the technology can be translated directly into the operating economics of a fleet.

Long-haul freight is particularly suitable for this transition because its operating environment is relatively structured. Highways have clearly defined lanes, standardized road infrastructure and comparatively predictable traffic patterns. Compared with urban streets, where pedestrians, bicycles, motorcycles, intersections and irregular road behavior create highly complex interactions, highways reduce some of the perception and decision-making challenges faced by autonomous systems.

At the same time, long-haul trucks travel enormous distances. Every vehicle operating on a real route generates data about road conditions, traffic behavior, weather and system performance. That data can then be fed back into algorithms and vehicle design, creating a technological and commercial feedback loop: vehicles enter operation, real-world data accumulates, algorithms improve, costs fall and larger-scale deployment becomes possible.

The development of Inceptio Technology illustrates this gradual approach. Founded in 2018, the company positioned itself around the combination of autonomous-driving technology, mass-produced trucks and freight operations. In 2021, it began commercial operations of L3 autonomous trucks, working with major logistics companies and cargo owners. By October 2022, its autonomous trucks had accumulated more than 10 million kilometers in commercial operations, according to the company. Its approach was not to eliminate the driver immediately, but to progressively transfer repetitive and demanding driving tasks from humans to machines.

That distinction is crucial. L3 autonomous driving still requires human supervision and intervention under specified conditions, but it can substantially reduce the physical and cognitive burden placed on drivers during long-distance transportation. The driver becomes less of a conventional full-time operator and increasingly functions as a supervisor of an automated transportation system. In this model, autonomous driving is introduced not as an overnight replacement for human labor, but as a gradual restructuring of the division of labor.

China’s autonomous-driving industry has also found an even more controllable entry point: mines, ports and industrial logistics facilities.

A mining site does not resemble a crowded urban road. Vehicle routes are relatively fixed, operating areas are clearly defined, and loading, transportation and unloading can be coordinated within a controlled system. This makes it possible to deploy higher levels of automation before the technology is ready to handle every unpredictable situation found on public roads.

In Inner Mongolia, for example, large autonomous mining trucks are already being deployed in open-pit coal mines. Some vehicles operate without conventional driver cabins, while autonomous platooning systems can allow one safety operator to supervise several vehicles. These machines can perform loading, driving, obstacle avoidance and unloading with limited or no direct human intervention.

This is where autonomous driving begins to look less like a new automotive feature and more like a new industrial production system.

The convergence of autonomous driving with electrification strengthens this transformation. Electric heavy trucks can reduce energy costs, while autonomous systems can optimize acceleration, braking, following distances and route selection. In controlled industrial environments, electric autonomous trucks can potentially operate continuously according to centrally managed schedules, increasing equipment utilization while reducing dependence on human labor.

China’s industrial structure provides an unusually large number of such application scenarios. The country has enormous ports, mining operations, manufacturing facilities, logistics parks and freight corridors. These environments create a broad range of opportunities for autonomous commercial vehicles to generate economic value before fully autonomous passenger transportation becomes ubiquitous.

Policy has also played an important role in accelerating this process. Chinese authorities have identified intelligent mining and autonomous industrial vehicles as part of broader efforts to improve mine safety and promote industrial digitalization. Policy support, infrastructure investment and local demonstration projects have helped create conditions in which autonomous vehicles can move from technical trials toward commercial operations.

The development of autonomous heavy trucks is therefore increasingly becoming an ecosystem rather than a competition between individual technology companies. Automakers, autonomous-driving developers, battery manufacturers, logistics companies, mining groups and financial institutions are becoming interconnected.

This can be seen in the emerging investment relationships surrounding autonomous trucking. Battery companies have incentives to support electric commercial vehicles, logistics companies need more efficient transportation capacity, mining groups need safer and more automated operations, while autonomous-driving companies need real-world operating environments and large volumes of data. Investment relationships can therefore become a mechanism for integrating supply, technology and demand.

Pony.ai, for instance, has expanded its Robotruck business from long-haul freight into urban distribution. At the 2026 Beijing International Automotive Exhibition, the company presented a fourth-generation L4 autonomous heavy truck based on a battery-electric commercial vehicle platform and announced plans for large-scale deployment. It also introduced an L4 autonomous light truck for urban logistics and announced cooperation with China COSCO Shipping Logistics, reflecting a broader strategy that links long-haul transportation with urban distribution.

The significance of this shift lies in the attempt to build an integrated autonomous freight network rather than simply sell autonomous vehicles. A truck equipped with an autonomous-driving system is still only a vehicle. A commercially viable autonomous freight system requires vehicles, software, cloud-based dispatching, remote assistance, maintenance, insurance, financing, energy infrastructure and logistics customers to work together.

This also explains why China’s autonomous-driving development has followed a relatively gradual path. The transition from L2 driver assistance to L3 conditional automation and eventually to L4 driverless operation is not simply a matter of improving sensors or artificial intelligence. It requires redundant braking and steering systems, reliable computing platforms, functional safety, cybersecurity, remote operations and clearly defined rules for responsibility when something goes wrong.

The gap between a successful demonstration and a scalable business remains significant. Autonomous trucks operating on private industrial roads face a fundamentally different challenge from autonomous vehicles operating freely across cities and provinces. Public-road deployment requires coordination among different jurisdictions, consistent rules for autonomous vehicles, infrastructure compatibility and a legal framework capable of determining responsibility in the event of an accident.

Labor is another issue that cannot be separated from the technological transition. China’s freight industry remains heavily dependent on drivers, many of whom work long hours under physically demanding conditions. Autonomous driving could reduce the most repetitive and exhausting aspects of truck driving, but large-scale automation could also reshape employment across the industry.

The eventual outcome is therefore unlikely to be a simple equation of machines replacing people. A more gradual transformation could see some drivers move into roles involving remote supervision, fleet management, vehicle maintenance, dispatching and operational support. Whether this transition creates sufficient new opportunities, and how workers affected by automation are supported, will be an important test of the social value of the technology.

China’s emphasis on autonomous heavy trucks ultimately reflects a broader industrial calculation. The country has a huge freight market, extensive manufacturing capacity, large-scale mining and port operations, rapidly expanding electric-vehicle supply chains and a growing demand for logistics efficiency. These conditions provide autonomous driving with something every emerging technology needs: a large number of real problems that can be solved for a measurable economic return.

The United States has demonstrated the potential of autonomous passenger transportation through robotaxis, while China is building a different kind of autonomous-driving laboratory on highways, at ports and inside mines. The distinction should not be understood as a simple contest between two national technology strategies. Rather, each approach reflects the economic environments in which autonomous driving is being commercialized.

For China, the heavy truck may prove to be more than another application of artificial intelligence. It could become a bridge between automation, electrification and the restructuring of the logistics industry. As autonomous vehicles move from isolated pilot projects toward larger fleets, the central question will no longer be whether a truck can drive itself. The more consequential question will be whether an entire freight network can operate around autonomous vehicles.

If that transition succeeds, the significance of autonomous trucking will extend well beyond the truck itself. It will represent a shift in how freight is organized, how industrial labor is allocated, how energy is consumed and how transportation assets are managed. China’s autonomous-driving revolution may therefore begin not with the passenger sitting in the back seat of a robotaxi, but with the cargo moving silently through a mine, across a port or along a highway.

Source: xinhuanet, tech gmw, sohu, tech cnr 

Tan Ting: China’s First Deaf Legal Professional, Bridging Silence and Justice

Tendenzblick
-
0
Tan Ting: China’s First Deaf Legal Professional, Bridging Silence and Justice

Tan Ting was born in 1992 into an ordinary farming family in the remote Daliang Mountains of Sichuan, China. When she was eight years old, she lost her hearing because of an illness. Her childhood changed overnight. She could no longer hear the voices around her and was forced to leave school. While other children carried their schoolbags to class, Tan could only watch them from home.

Her parents refused to give up on her. They spent years taking her to different hospitals, using almost all of their savings in the hope that she could hear again. When Tan was 13, they finally found a special education school in Xichang that was willing to accept her. For Tan, returning to school felt like being given a second chance at life.

She knew she had fallen far behind her classmates, so she worked hard to catch up. She studied whenever she had the chance, sometimes reading under a blanket with a flashlight after her classmates had gone to sleep. Even when she was sick and receiving an IV, she continued studying. Her determination eventually paid off. She progressed rapidly through school and, in 2013, was admitted to Chongqing Normal University, where she studied special education.

At first, Tan planned to become a special education teacher. Her career path changed after she graduated in 2017 and came across a recruitment notice from Tang Shuai, a lawyer who had been providing legal services to deaf people.

Tang was born into a deaf family and had learned sign language from an early age. After becoming a lawyer, he began working extensively on cases involving deaf people. He found that many deaf people faced serious barriers when dealing with the legal system. The problem was not simply a lack of legal knowledge. The natural sign language used by many deaf people could be very different from the formal language used in legal documents and courtrooms. Misunderstandings could therefore have serious consequences.

Tang wanted to train deaf people who understood both sign language and the law. Tan joined his law firm as a deaf assistant. At first, she mainly handled basic tasks such as organizing documents and receiving visitors. But as she encountered more deaf people seeking legal help, she gradually realized how large their unmet legal needs were.

Many of the people who came to the firm did not know what their legal rights were or how to protect them. Some were dealing with domestic violence or marriage disputes. Others had been deceived or defrauded. Tan often found that before she could address a legal problem, she first had to explain the basic legal concepts to the person seeking help.

This convinced her to study law herself. The challenge was enormous. Tan had no formal legal education, and legal textbooks were filled with unfamiliar terminology. Many online law lectures had no subtitles, making them difficult for her to follow. She relied on speech-to-text software, dictionaries, reference materials and help from her colleagues. She studied before work, after work and during every spare moment she could find.

She took the national legal qualification examination twice and failed both times, missing the required score by 10 points the first time and four points the second. She refused to stop.

In 2020, shortly before her third examination, Tan received devastating news. Her mother was diagnosed with late-stage cancer. Tan wanted to stay with her, but her mother insisted that she take the examination. Her mother told her that she should live for herself as well.

Tan eventually went to the examination. She answered the questions while fighting back tears, knowing that every minute away from her mother was a minute she could not spend at her side. This time, she passed.

Tan became the first deaf person in China publicly reported to have passed the national legal qualification examination. For her, however, passing the examination was not the end of the journey. It brought another question: how could she actually serve deaf clients in a legal system designed primarily for hearing people?

Because of the communication barriers involved in courtroom proceedings, Tan could not simply work in exactly the same way as a conventional courtroom lawyer. Instead, she and Tang focused much of their attention on legal consultation and public legal education for deaf people.

Tan began receiving requests for help from across the country. Some people traveled long distances to meet her. Others contacted her through video calls and social media. A consultation that might take a short time with a hearing client could take three times as long or even longer when sign language communication was involved.

She gradually became a bridge between deaf people and the legal system. She helped clients understand their situations, explained what the law required and showed them what options were available. In many cases, the first step was simply helping people understand what the law meant.

Tan also began using short videos and livestreams to provide legal education. She explained everyday legal issues such as divorce, unpaid debts and fraud through sign language. At the same time, she used her platform to introduce hearing audiences to the experiences and communication patterns of deaf people.

She also decided to relearn how to speak. After losing her hearing as a child, she had gradually stopped speaking because she could no longer hear her own voice. To improve her communication with hearing people, she used speech-recognition software to check her pronunciation. She repeated individual sentences again and again, sometimes dozens of times, until the software could recognize them correctly. Even a simple sentence such as “Nice to meet you” took months of practice.

The effort gradually changed her daily life. Today, Tan can communicate using both sign language and spoken language, allowing her to interact with a wider range of people.

Her work has also shown her that one person cannot solve the shortage of legal services available to deaf people. She hopes more professionals will learn about deaf communities and develop the ability to communicate with them. She believes that deaf people need not only lawyers who understand the law, but also legal professionals who understand their language, culture and everyday experiences.

In 2021, Tan began teaching at Southwest University of Political Science and Law. She hopes to help train a new generation of professionals who can provide legal services to deaf people.

Tan’s journey began in a rural village in the Daliang Mountains, where losing her hearing forced her to leave school and made her feel isolated from the world around her. Years later, she entered university, learned law from scratch, failed the legal examination twice and finally passed it on her third attempt.

She has continued moving forward through education, legal work, public legal education and teaching. Her goal is no longer simply to prove what one deaf person can achieve. She wants to help create a future in which deaf people can understand the law, seek legal assistance and participate more fully in society.

For Tan, the law is another language that needs to be made accessible. Through her hands, her words and the knowledge she has worked so hard to acquire, she is trying to bring that language to people who have too often been left outside the conversation.

Source: people cctv, sohu, jfdaily

Why China Keeps Its Military Out of Business: Protecting the State, the Market, and the People

Tendenzblick
-
0
Why China Keeps Its Military Out of Business: Protecting the State, the Market, and the People

Why must the military stay out of business? In China, this is not merely a matter of military discipline. It is a fundamental question involving political order, economic governance, civil-military relations, and the nature of the armed forces themselves.

In 1998, amid a nationwide campaign against smuggling and corruption, Jiang Zemin stressed that the military, the armed police, and the country’s law-enforcement and judicial organs must be financially supported by the state and must completely cease commercial activities. 

The principle was straightforward: the military exists to defend the country and serve the people, not to compete in the marketplace or pursue commercial profits. Its resources should be guaranteed through the national budget, allowing it to concentrate on training, preparedness, and national defense.

The decision had a clear historical background. During the early decades of reform and opening up, some military-affiliated enterprises engaged in commercial activities. At a time when China’s economic foundation was still relatively weak and military funding was limited, such activities had understandable historical reasons. Yet experience increasingly demonstrated that allowing the military to develop independent commercial interests could create serious problems.

The central issue is not whether the military can make money. It is that the military is fundamentally different from an ordinary market participant. It possesses coercive power and enjoys special institutional status that private businesses and ordinary government agencies do not have. Once an armed organization enters commercial competition, its institutional advantages can easily become economic advantages. Market competition can then become distorted, and public power can become entangled with private interests.

This is why military involvement in commerce can be particularly dangerous. Commercial activities can divert military personnel and institutions from their primary responsibilities, create conflicts between the military and local governments or businesses, and encourage the use of institutional privileges for economic gain. More seriously, when an organization possessing armed force also controls substantial economic resources, economic interests can begin to reinforce political power.

Jiang Zemin identified precisely these dangers when he argued that commercial activities could allow the principles of commercial exchange to penetrate military political life, undermine the discipline and values of military personnel, and create conditions for corruption. Military involvement in business could also put the armed forces in competition with civilians and local governments, damaging both military-civilian relations and the public image of the People’s Liberation Army.

International experience provides further evidence of the risks involved. In a number of countries, military organizations have historically controlled or maintained extensive interests in companies, land, finance, energy, construction, telecommunications, and other sectors. Such arrangements have often created economic interests that are difficult to separate from political power.

Vietnam provides one example. Its military has historically maintained significant economic activities and military-linked enterprises have operated in sectors including telecommunications, ports, construction, and finance. The relationship between military institutions and the civilian economy has deep historical roots, but it has also raised questions about transparency, oversight, competition, and the proper boundary between military responsibilities and commercial interests. Vietnam’s subsequent efforts to reform and restructure military-owned businesses demonstrate that separating military power from commercial interests can become increasingly difficult once such economic structures have become deeply established.

Iran illustrates another dimension of the problem. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has developed extensive political and economic influence, with military-linked organizations involved in areas such as construction, energy, communications, and other strategic sectors. When an armed organization possesses both political authority and substantial economic interests, economic power can reinforce political power, while political influence can in turn protect economic interests. Once such a structure develops, economic reform becomes much more difficult because reform inevitably encounters entrenched interests.

Thailand offers yet another example of how military and economic power can interact. The country’s armed forces have historically exercised considerable political influence, and military-linked economic interests have contributed to the broader political role of the armed forces. The specific institutional circumstances differ from those of China, but the underlying lesson is relevant: when a military develops extensive independent economic interests, it can acquire a source of power beyond its core defense function. This can complicate civilian governance and distort normal economic competition.

These experiences help explain why China chose a fundamentally different path: commercial enterprises should be separated from the military, while the state assumes responsibility for financing national defense. China’s system is a socialist market economy. Businesses are expected to compete within a unified legal and regulatory framework, while the state uses fiscal policy, regulation, and public institutions to provide essential public goods. The military, as the country’s armed force, should not use its special institutional position to compete for commercial profits. Its necessary funding should instead come through the national fiscal system.

The principle often described as the military “living on state funding” is therefore much more than a question of military budgets. It establishes a clear institutional boundary. The military’s survival and development are guaranteed by the state rather than by commercial activity. It does not need to compete with local governments for economic resources, compete with private enterprises for market share, or defend independent commercial interests.

This arrangement also reinforces the political character of the People’s Liberation Army. The fundamental principle is that the military serves the country and the people rather than any individual, organization, or economic interest. Precisely because the military possesses extraordinary coercive power, its relationship with commercial interests must be strictly regulated. The greater the power, the clearer the boundaries must be.

In this sense, keeping the military out of business is essentially about keeping the “gun” and the “wallet” in their proper places. The military is responsible for national defense; civilian institutions are responsible for public administration; businesses operate according to market rules and law; and the state provides the financial resources necessary for national defense. Each sphere has its own responsibilities and limits.

The purpose is not to deny the importance of economic development or market forces. On the contrary, it is to protect the integrity of the socialist market economy by ensuring that market competition is not subordinated to armed power. A modern economy requires predictable rules, fair competition, and unified regulation. It cannot function properly if organizations possessing coercive power are simultaneously major commercial competitors.

The separation of the military from commercial activity therefore serves several purposes at once. It protects the professionalism and combat effectiveness of the armed forces. It protects businesses and local governments from unfair institutional competition. It protects public finances from the emergence of autonomous military economic interests. And it protects the political integrity of the People’s Liberation Army by preventing military power from becoming a source of private economic power.

The broader lesson is simple. Military power should defend the economic order, not control it. Economic resources should be governed through law, public finance, and the institutions of the socialist market economy, rather than through the independent economic power of the armed forces.

China’s decision to end military commercial activities should therefore be understood not simply as a prohibition on soldiers doing business, but as an important institutional choice in modern state governance. By separating military power from commercial interests, China seeks to ensure that the armed forces remain focused on national defense, that markets operate according to law, and that economic resources remain within a unified national system of fiscal and market governance.

A military that is removed from commercial interests can concentrate on defending the country. A market protected from military intervention can operate according to fair competition. And a military whose funding is guaranteed by the state can maintain a clear and stable relationship with both the government and the people.

The principle is ultimately about institutional boundaries: the military protects the nation; the state governs the economy; and the market operates according to law. Those boundaries are essential not only to military professionalism, but also to a stable political order and a healthy socialist market economy.

Source: reformdata, sohu, cpc people, e23, mod gov cn

Korean American Self-Defense in the LA Uprising: A View from the Frontlines of America’s Racial Divide

Tendenzblick
-
0
Korean American Self-Defense in the LA Uprising: A View from the Frontlines of America’s Racial Divide

The 1992 Los Angeles uprising is often remembered through two images: the beating of Rodney King by Los Angeles police officers and the Korean American shopkeepers who stood on rooftops with firearms to protect their businesses. The latter image later produced the controversial label “Roof Koreans,” a term that has been repeatedly invoked as a symbol of immigrant self-reliance, armed resistance, and distrust of the state. 

Yet to understand what happened in Los Angeles, it is not enough to celebrate or condemn the people on those rooftops. Their presence was the visible consequence of a much deeper crisis involving policing, racial segregation, immigration, class inequality, and the failure of the American state to provide equal protection to all of its residents.

The uprising followed the acquittal of police officers involved in the beating of Rodney King, whose assault had been captured on videotape and circulated widely. The verdict was experienced by many Black Americans as confirmation of a long-standing reality: police violence against Black communities could be documented and still go largely unpunished. 

The subsequent unrest was therefore not simply a spontaneous eruption of anger. It reflected decades of racial segregation, unemployment, poverty, discriminatory policing, and unequal political power. Los Angeles presented itself as a multicultural metropolis, but its neighborhoods were deeply divided by race and class. Communities could live only a few blocks apart while inhabiting entirely different social and economic worlds.

Korean American business owners became particularly vulnerable within this structure. During the decades before the uprising, many Korean immigrants had entered small-business sectors such as liquor stores, grocery stores, clothing shops, and other neighborhood businesses. 

These enterprises were often located in predominantly Black or Latino neighborhoods, partly because commercial property was more affordable there and partly because immigrant entrepreneurs faced barriers in entering established professional and corporate sectors. The result was an uncomfortable proximity: Korean immigrants operated businesses in communities whose residents were frequently economically disadvantaged, while the immigrants themselves were often struggling to establish a foothold in American society.

This proximity sometimes generated resentment. Korean shopkeepers could be perceived as outsiders extracting income from local communities, while Korean immigrants could perceive their customers and surrounding neighborhoods primarily through the lens of crime, insecurity, and economic survival. 

Neither perception adequately explained the underlying structure. The problem was not simply “Black prejudice against Koreans” or “Korean prejudice against Black people.” Both communities were being positioned within an unequal urban economy in which access to capital, property, political influence, and public protection was distributed unevenly.

The killing of fifteen-year-old Latasha Harlins by Korean American store owner Soon Ja Du in 1991 became an especially important symbol of this tension. Du was convicted of voluntary manslaughter but received probation rather than a prison sentence. For many Black residents, the sentence reinforced the belief that the legal system valued Korean property owners and white institutions more highly than Black lives. For Korean Americans, however, the case existed alongside their own experience of racial vulnerability and economic insecurity. The tragedy therefore became part of a larger pattern in which the grievances of one marginalized community could easily be directed toward another.

This is one of the most important lessons of 1992. American racial politics can encourage subordinate groups to compete with one another for limited economic resources, security, and recognition. It is tempting to describe this simply as a deliberate strategy by “America” to make different racial groups fight each other, but the historical reality is more complicated. 

The conflict emerged from institutional arrangements: residential segregation, unequal schools, concentrated poverty, discriminatory policing, restricted access to capital, and a political system in which different communities competed for scarce resources. When these structural forces are translated into everyday encounters, systemic inequality can appear as interpersonal or cultural conflict. The result is what might be called horizontal racial conflict: communities that share experiences of marginalization become rivals rather than political allies.

The “Roof Koreans” phenomenon has to be understood within this context. The sight of armed Korean Americans defending their stores is sometimes presented as evidence that Koreans possessed an instinctive willingness to defend themselves that other communities lacked. Such an interpretation is misleading. The armed response was shaped by a combination of circumstances: the weakness of police protection during the unrest, the concentration of Korean-owned businesses in affected neighborhoods, immigrant distrust of public institutions, and a cultural background in which military service had been a significant part of male socialization.

South Korea is a society deeply shaped by the experience of war and national division. Under the country’s conscription system, South Korean men have historically been subject to mandatory military service, although the exact obligations have varied by generation and individual status. Many Korean men of the generation who immigrated to the United States before or around the 1990s had military experience. 

This does not mean that Koreans are “naturally militaristic,” nor does military service automatically make a person willing to use violence. It does, however, mean that firearms, uniforms, defensive formations, and the basic idea of responding to a security threat were not entirely unfamiliar concepts to many first-generation Korean men.

That background interacted with another uniquely American reality: the widespread presence of civilian firearms and the cultural legitimacy of armed self-defense in the United States. The “Roof Koreans” were therefore produced by the intersection of Korean military socialization and American gun culture. Their behavior should not be interpreted as proof of an inherent Korean character. It was a historical response to a specific environment in which immigrants believed that the state could no longer guarantee the safety of their families and livelihoods.

The deeper irony is that many Korean immigrants had come to the United States precisely because they believed it offered security, freedom, and opportunity. Korean immigration after the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 expanded dramatically, as the abolition of the old national-origins quota system opened the door to larger-scale Asian immigration. 

Migrants arrived for many different reasons: economic opportunity, education, family reunification, political uncertainty, and the desire for a different future for their children. Yet immigration did not necessarily mean upward mobility. Many highly educated immigrants experienced professional deskilling, while others entered small businesses because racial discrimination and the structure of the American labor market limited their alternatives.

The Korean American relationship with the United States has therefore never been simply one of admiration or rejection. For South Korea, the United States represented military protection, economic power, technological modernity, and access to a global system dominated by American institutions. 

At the same time, American military and political power has also been a source of historical criticism. The U.S.–South Korean alliance developed within the Cold War, alongside American involvement in a South Korean political order that was for long periods authoritarian. For many Koreans, particularly among generations shaped by the democratic movements of the 1970s and 1980s, the United States could simultaneously be viewed as protector, hegemon, economic model, military power, and political actor deserving criticism.

American popular culture itself contains evidence of this contradiction. Television programs such as MASH*, although produced in the United States and nominally set during the Korean War, used that war to criticize militarism, bureaucracy, and the absurdity of organized violence. This tradition of American self-criticism matters because the United States is not simply an external oppressor standing outside its own society. 

It is a country whose institutions, media, and citizens have repeatedly argued about the meaning of American power. The Korean American experience consequently developed within an ambivalent relationship with America: immigrants could depend upon the country, admire its opportunities, criticize its racism, and challenge its foreign policy at the same time.

The same contradiction appears in the concept of the “model minority.” Korean Americans and other Asian Americans were increasingly represented as evidence that racial minorities could succeed through discipline, education, family values, and hard work. On the surface, this appeared to be a positive image. In reality, the model-minority stereotype served an important political function. 

It transformed structural questions into individual ones. If one minority group could supposedly succeed through hard work, then poverty and inequality among other minorities could be interpreted as failures of culture or personal responsibility rather than consequences of discrimination and unequal institutions.

The comparison between Asian Americans and Black Americans was especially damaging. It encouraged the idea that the success of one minority proved the failure of another. Korean immigrants could be told that they represented the disciplined immigrant ideal, while Black communities were implicitly presented as examples of social dysfunction. Such comparisons ignored the radically different histories of immigration, slavery, segregation, property ownership, and access to political power that shaped each group.

The 1992 uprising exposed the weakness of this framework. Korean Americans were neither simply privileged Americans nor powerless victims. They occupied an intermediate and unstable position within the American racial hierarchy. They could experience racism while simultaneously benefiting from certain forms of racialization. They could be economically successful while remaining politically marginalized. They could identify strongly with the American dream while discovering that the state did not necessarily protect them when that dream was threatened.

For Korean Americans, 1992 therefore represented more than the destruction of businesses. It forced a reconsideration of what it meant to be an immigrant community in America. The question was no longer simply how Koreans could accumulate wealth and protect their families. It was also how they should participate in American political life, how they should relate to Black and Latino communities, and whether immigrant security could be achieved through private defense alone. In the years that followed, Korean American political participation and community organizing increasingly reflected a recognition that isolation offered limited protection.

The historical significance of the “Roof Koreans” lies precisely in this contradiction. They were armed because they were afraid; they distrusted the state because they had experienced its absence; they defended private property because economic survival was closely tied to that property. 

Their story is neither a simple celebration of immigrant toughness nor a simple indictment of Korean Americans. It is a picture of what happens when an unequal society forces vulnerable communities to protect themselves within a system that has failed to provide equal security.

Seen from this perspective, the central story of Los Angeles in 1992 was not Black people versus Korean people. It was a broader crisis of the American racial and economic order. The conflict between communities was real, and its consequences were devastating, but treating it as a cultural clash between two ethnic groups obscures the institutions that produced the conditions for that clash. The more uncomfortable question is why communities with different histories of marginalization were repeatedly placed in competition with one another while the larger structures of policing, segregation, poverty, and political inequality remained intact.

The image of Koreans standing on rooftops with guns has survived because it is visually powerful and politically convenient. It turns a complicated historical crisis into a simple story about courage, self-reliance, and racial conflict. But history demands a more difficult interpretation. The rooftop was not merely a symbol of Korean toughness. It was also a symbol of state failure, immigrant insecurity, racial fragmentation, and the contradictions of the American dream. 

The United States, a society capable of offering extraordinary opportunity while reproducing profound inequalities, a country that celebrates multiculturalism while allowing racial groups to be separated by class and geography, and a political system in which marginalized communities can be encouraged, sometimes through institutions, sometimes through public narratives, and often simply through economic necessity, to fight horizontally rather than confront the structures that divide them.

The legacy of 1992 should consequently not be reduced to a question of who was right or who was wrong. Its enduring lesson is that racial conflict cannot be understood apart from political economy and state power. 

The history of Korean Americans demonstrates how immigrants can move from outsiders to business owners, from victims to participants in racial politics, and eventually toward a more complicated understanding of America. The rooftop remains a powerful image precisely because it contains all of these contradictions: fear and confidence, dependence and self-reliance, assimilation and alienation, the American dream and the failure of the American state to deliver it equally.

Source: savoirtw, rooftopshooting, sohu, filed ethos, koreatown storytelling program

1...678...292Page 7 of 292

Die Redaktion dieser Plattform hat sich das Ziel gesetzt, eine große Vielfalt an Meinungen zu präsentieren, um den Leserinnen und Lesern die Möglichkeit zu geben, sich selbst sich selbst zu informieren und eine eigene Meinung zu bilden. Sowohl positive als auch kritische Nachrichten, Berichte oder Kommentare sind willkommen und werden wertgeschätzt. Alle Beiträge bemühen sich weiterhin, um einen respektvollen und höflichen Umgangston. (Medienprojekt von VANA)

Kontaktieren Sie uns: info@tendenzblick.net

© Copyright - TB - Aktuelle Nachrichten online