Long Reads

Comments 58

The AI Threat to Open Societies

Jan 24, 2019 George Soros

In an age of populist nationalism, open societies have increasingly come under strain. But the threat of atavistic ideological movements pales in comparison to that posed by powerful new technologies in the hands of authoritarians.

DAVOS – I want to warn the world about an unprecedented danger that’s threatening the very survival of open societies.

The rapidly improving instruments of control that machine learning and artificial intelligence can produce are giving repressive regimes an inherent advantage. For them, the improving instruments of control are a help; for open societies they constitute a mortal danger.

I’ll focus on China, where President Xi Jinping wants a one-party state to reign supreme. Xi is trying to consolidate all the available information about a person into a centralized database to create a “social credit system.” Based on these data, people will be evaluated by algorithms that will determine whether they pose a threat to the one-party state. People will then be treated accordingly.

We hope you're enjoying Project Syndicate.

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Get unlimited access to PS premium content, including in-depth commentaries, book reviews, exclusive interviews, On Point, the Big Picture, the PS Archive, and our annual year-ahead magazine.

Already have an account or want to create one? Log in

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 57 in all 57 Comments on this article

B Wilds Feb 13, 2019

China is a great example of how with the aid of new technologies governments across the world have greatly expanded their ability to watch our movements and everything we do. How do you begin to fight or turn back a force that has even incorporated and leveraged the ever-present smartphone as an ultra-powerful surveillance device?

The control over the individual will become complete as they move us towards being a cashless economy. This translates into where we will be unable to buy food, may at any moment have our ability to message others cut, and will be forced to rely on autonomous vehicles to deliver us to our destinations.

Such a lack of control over our lives constitutes their total control over us making us powerless pawns and slaves with little choice but to do their bidding or perish. The article below delves into just how fast the noose is tightening around our necks.

https://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2019/01/power-of-orwellian-state-almost.html
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Elizabeth Pula Feb 10, 2019

"This data has to be protected by any framework of data regulation that wants to be taken seriously. And that fundamental data is your genome."

So important. National and International laws are not able to maintain a reasonable pace with technology developmental progress worldwide. A good number of people worldwide do NOT have legal rights. Due to corruption of historical legal systems that did allow legal rights for a majority, the rights are eroding for the ones that did have legal rights. Rule declaration in Germany is presently the first that is even beginning to address any framework of serious data regulation.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Elizabeth Pula Feb 10, 2019

On Vision- 02-10-2019

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/softbank-vision-fund

Here’s a nice little quote just for you:

“I think another very common theme that runs through all of our investments is really around data,” Jeffrey Housenbold, a managing partner at the Vision Fund, says. “It’s really about data and the merger of human and machine in this notion of the singularity and artificial intelligence. How do we process that data in order to make the world a better place – to make people happier, to enrich their lives, to provide better products and services? It doesn’t matter if it’s by using data to enable drug discovery or trying to make food delivery more efficient. Data runs across almost every one of our companies.”

That’s Masayoshi Son’s vision: a future where every time that we use our smartphone, or call a taxi, or order a meal, or stay in a hotel, or make a payment, or receive medical treatment, we will be doing so in a data ¬transaction with a company that belongs to the SoftBank family. And, as Son likes to say: “Whoever controls data controls the world.”

“And, as Son likes to say: Whoever controls data controls the world.”

Soros, I really don’t want to leave you, and everybody else just hanging from some ominous words, like a loose thread.

So, here’s a little riddle.

Father time is real, running a race with a whole lot of wired and wireless meeces.
He ran around the clock, in and out of the clock, above and below the clock.
How did he windup somewhere, nowhere, anywhere, and everywhere inbetween?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Adrian Haxhiaj Feb 7, 2019

Dear Mr. Soros! I very much appreciate and enjoy your energy and passion to contribute on a kind of post-WWII and Post-Soviet Era Illuminism. I am sure directly or indirectly your efforts changed something. Nevertheless, your good intention/s was and is in these days, even more, is/are not understood and appreciated. Worse. Many of your "candidates" who could change the world and make the Open Society Ideals happen are now the most fierce enemies of your philosophy. You are very well aware of these rising stars you promoted since 1990, especially in the Eastern and South-Eastern Europe. These guys are more dangerous than any Xi or Li. Because this most sophisticated neo-nazi generation is coming out like mushrooms after the rain. They use your slogans, your money, your network to blow in the air the very difficult and fragile project called EU. You feed them, but they are biting your hand in each possible occasion.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Elizabeth Pula Feb 6, 2019

Read this and take it to another level of effective application:

https://digitalcommons.molloy.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1027&context=edu_fac
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Boris Krumov Feb 1, 2019

What's the pragmatically practical use to paywall an article that is freely available on the source domain ?! :D
- george sos Feb 2, 2019
  
  there is no paywall here,all you have to do is subscribe for free.At least that s how i am reading this article right now..:)
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Emanuel Müller Jan 29, 2019

According to George Soros, China's population is currently divided into two classes of citizen, one class is noticeably larger than the other, with around 1,403,500,365 people in 2016, the so-called non-Xi Jinping chinese, the other is noticeably smaller, with around more or less 1 people in 2016 the so-called Xi Jinping chinese.
Soros apparent intention is to drive a wedge between those two classes in order to liberate one class from the oppression by the other class.
He doesn't say though what upside there might be in a citizen rating system, so his comment might be perceived as an invitation for the reader to get imaginative.
For example, the reader might think that as great as the rule of law might be as implemented in the West, it might be more at the service of the richer than at the service of the poorer parts of the population as the best legal teams might charge higher fees for their services. As a consequence, we might imagine that a social rating system might be interesting to try to roll out a form a justice for the poor, to complement the justice for the rich system known as the rule of law.
One idea might be that the various predators, be it financial, industrial, sexual, homicidal etc. that society never fails to generate do have a learning curve that they need to successfully complete before reaching the level of noxiousness at which the rich might need to resort to the rule of law to protect themselves.
If there is a possibility for example through a social rating system, to prevent the would-be or could-be predators to grow and hone there skills, both psychological and technical, some form of justice for the poor, thus preventive justice might theorically be in sight.
Soros's funny but possibly shallow understanding of confucian governance might be helped by the book "the confucian-legalist state, a new theory of chinese history" by chicago university professor Dingxin Zhao, that with a background in microbiology has both the advantages of conceptual originality due to transversality and the learned practice of rational consistency.
- Elizabeth Pula Feb 10, 2019
  
  fantastic, Prof.Dr. Mueller!
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Watson Brown Jan 29, 2019
  
  so china is run like a prison. the work you cited by that pro beijinger can't hide it
  - george sos Feb 2, 2019
    
    exactly!
    listing the pros of the "police state" is not a good way to blind western society so it doesnt see the trap.
    No thanks,your perverts will always find ways to do what they want as long as there is inequality ,and as long the few rich and powerful abuse power and steal public wealth.
    The economic system of China is a death bed,where unless you know some party member and you keep your ideas about freedom to yourself ,you have no chance to achieve anything.
    Yes there are many problems in society ,most of these problems are a product of our economic systems.
    
    If people have enough to live/eat/have shelter/safety ,there are very very few who d risk this .
    This is a way to fight small crime (which is the most populated category).
    But that is not what societies get hurt by.
    It is the crimes of the few,rich and powerful that create the circumstances in which no honest person can survive.
    It is the rich and powerful that bend rules or create rules that suit their interests.They dont care if their actions hurt society. They only care for their personal enrichment .China has its own greedy corrupt powerful inhumane perverts,not any different from the western ones.
    If humanity has the need for AI ,that is in order to fight against the tricks the tax evaders use around the globe...And to fight against banksters and corporations that want to rule our world as emperors of some past eras.
    No thanks,all i want for china is to have a real democracy,with human rights(unless its people are sooo brain washed by then that they refuse to be free!!!
    .And to prevent anyone from asking ,yes the west is also abusing human rights.
    But two bads dont make a good.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Elizabeth Pula Jan 28, 2019

If you are really concerned about "Open Societies", then, what you really need to support is international legislation to enforce limitations to cap "top corporate pay and perks" to the few that are very effectively just short-term-gain capitalizing monopolies based on theft actions by various operations systems and computer networking platforms.

What the WSJ is mentioning in this link:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/sec-investigates-nissan-over-disclosures-on-executive-pay-11548658741

is a drop in the bucket. I'm sure the decision-makers at the WSJ, and the SEC are quite aware of that fact and reality also. Just like you,too. Not necessarily bad or good, just opportunistic for a certain portion of a certain quintile of global demographics.

Of course, I'm also aware of the fact and reality, however, I am not in a position of power to direct immediate change and consequential results, as some other people.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Prashant Kotak Jan 27, 2019

If you think what the Chinese are up to with the odious tech-powered 'Social Credit' systems, and other hi-tech surveillance (the Great Firewall etc.) is disturbing, then further terrors are not far down the line, not just for the Chinese, but for all humanity.

Beyond the loss of control of personal data to electronic tech, there is an ultimate, defining aspect of the data of every single individual, that is soon going to be totally compromised. This data has to be protected by any framework of data regulation that wants to be taken seriously. And that fundamental data is your genome. It holds the key to everything about you – and anyone who gains access to it will know what you will look like, what you will like, what illnesses you are prone to, which of your biological buttons to press to make you do different things. Imagine software platforms where, in you feed someone's hair, and on the screen emerges, like some nightmarish Warhole collage, an exposition of what that person will likely look like.

And as genome mapping progresses apace, and as gene-editing causality is probed through gene-splicing experimentation, the genome of every person will be completely exposed to all of humanity: all it will take is a bit of dead skin off that glass you held a minute ago.

And the terrifying timeline of this tech is anywhere between a little over a decade to two decades tops. It will be akin to handing every toddler in the world their own personal nuclear arsenal. And I have yet to see any believable idea how this data can can be protected, or how this scenario stopped, or how all current ideas of humanity not descend into meaninglessness. The Lintilla/Allitnil Syndrome come to life.
- Elizabeth Pula Feb 10, 2019
  
  "This data has to be protected by any framework of data regulation that wants to be taken seriously. And that fundamental data is your genome."
  
  So important. National and International laws are not able to maintain a reasonable pace with technology developmental progress worldwide. A good number of people worldwide do NOT have legal rights. Due to corruption of historical legal systems that did allow legal rights for a majority, the rights are eroding for the ones that did have legal rights. Rule declaration in Germany is presently the first that is even beginning to address any framework of serious data regulation.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Dyna Mike Jan 29, 2019
  
  Prashant Kotak you are 100% correct. Absolute personal/individual control over the (ab-)use of that DNA data (including currently absent & inadequate laws to prosecute abuse) is the only viable precaution against the tech powered dominance by a small 'elite' over the world population. This applies equally to AI & Quantum-computing that threaten the best encryption technologies available now, rendering individual control of personal data virtually impossible, unless privacy-centered encryption tools are based on Quantum-computing algorithms as well. Those privacy tools, as well as international laws that will effectively enable individuals to protect the use of their own data should be declared a human right and actively made available to each individual in the world or the whole concept of Soros' Open Society will turn in a 'free for all' grabbing contest. Let alone for contemporary law-making that increasingly favors authoritarianism by commerce and government alike there does not seem to be even a start to such basic protection anywhere. As the USA and China are the main developers of Quantum computing a deal between these 2 (and hopefully much more nations) containing the above outlined rights to individual privacy and broad and free availability of related encryption tools (not even available today) should be every human's prime goal, trumping ALL other goals, efforts and programs.
  George Soros, I'm quite sure you can see the logic here and I hope you and your network will turn their full attention and resources to achieve this 'utopian' pre-requisite for an Open Society future in the least devastating fashion. Thanks in advance, @DynaMike
  - Elizabeth Pula Feb 10, 2019
    
    "Those privacy tools, as well as international laws that will effectively enable individuals to protect the use of their own data should be declared a human right and actively made available to each individual in the world or the whole concept of Soros' Open Society will turn in a 'free for all' grabbing contest. "
    
    Very important.... thanks
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
B Wilds Jan 27, 2019

This trend has the potential to become very dangerous to the individual. The reason more people are not petrified by the government intruding so deeply into their lives is that they have been seduced by the idea it will help create a safer and better world and have accepted the illusion it will come at little cost to their freedom.

To those valuing the idea of freedom we live in frighting times, it seems that much of the world is moving towards becoming a totalitarian society in which the state apparatus is all-powerful. With each passing day. Big Brother with his corporate partners in crime keeps getting more invasive, intrusive and controlling. The article below looks into this rapidly expanding state of surveillance.

https://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2018/12/surveillance-justified-expands-grip-of.html
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Max Galarza Jan 27, 2019

"social credit system" recalls renew version of Orwell's book 1984. Once again reality surpassed fiction.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Watson Brown Jan 26, 2019

But the threat of atavistic ideological movements pales in comparison to that posed by powerful new technologies in the hands of authoritarians?

No surprises here. Afterall China is a carbon copy of Nazi Germany
- Elizabeth Pula Jan 26, 2019
  
  Unfortunately, the Chinese are outdoing anything that the Nazis never dreamed about. AND, you probably won't get that sentence either Watson.
  - Watson Brown Jan 26, 2019
    
    you mean "Unfortunately, the Chinese are outdoing anything that the Nazis COULD HAVE dreamed about. " The sentence doesn't make sense without the correction
    - Elizabeth Pula Feb 10, 2019
      
      Watson that was my being funny. Now, according to you, most probably: that was my attempt at pursuing any questionable ability at writing anything and attempting to present any words of any context, with any aspect of any connotation of any word that could indicate any level of humor, at my mediocre and ignorant level of logical abilities of awareness and writing capabilities or level of comprehension and understanding, if any, about anything of any consequence.
      A new reply to this comment has been posted.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
lt lee Jan 26, 2019

It is obvious that Mr Soros does not appreciate any kind of communism. He won't be Soros if he does not speak against the PRC. The question is whether he know much about China and Chinese well enough to speak from the position of knowledge.

He pinned his hope on the Chinese people and especially on political elites inspired by the Confucian tradition. Why not? But could he at least give an example of how Xi has violated anything Confucian?
- Watson Brown Jan 26, 2019
  
  he has knowledge to speak about china than you about your go-to-boogeymen
  - lt lee Jan 28, 2019
    
    Knowledge? What knowledge?
    No. He only regurgitate biased Western media. Garbage in, garbage out.
    - Watson Brown Jan 29, 2019
      
      you say that because you are pro beijing
      A new reply to this comment has been posted.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Paul Lee Jan 26, 2019

Dear Mr. Soros,

Although the issues posed by AI that you write about are very real, the true unprecedented and mortal danger to Open Societies is the rise of populism in Western democracies, exemplified by President Trump in the United States. Why should any nation aspire to become a liberal democracy, to be hijacked by juvenile, megalomaniac demagogues?

The continued preaching from Western countries is becoming more and more hypocritical every day (and I say this as a Korean-born Canadian citizen). When will the West look inward to examine and fix its own problems, not to mention the problems it is causing for other countries of the world, instead of blaming everything by demonizing others? You have chosen to be an American citizen, so you share responsibility for the politics of your country. Please let us know what you are doing about those, before you cast your stones at others.

Kind regards,

Paul
- Watson Brown Jan 29, 2019
  
  you say that because you like non-western populism
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Elizabeth Pula Jan 25, 2019

The issues are not authoritarian at all. The issues are software applications that are being implemented using business practices that are totally unethical. Companies like Facebook etal deserve to be eaten alive by competition that can easily take over. FB is terrible. Tesla is terrible. They are totally dishonest companies, with no legitimacy to stand on. Google is just as corrupt, as exemplified by its leadership. The strategies and supports by the Rand Corp. etc. are not inherently bad at all. It is unfortunately the bad implementation by bad leadership that is making the present platforms bad. The problem is not AI. The problem is not even China, or even Muslim authoritarianism. etc.etc.

China has one of the largest populations worldwide. Any governmental team that can turn around a society in the short-term historically that China has accomplished is a phenomenal feat. Brutal, yes. Is Western society any less brutal??? If there were any integrity by male international political leadership, there would be a trend towards "betterment" of laws and society. Has Western society played some great role as world benefactor? Not hardly. In fact, only very hardly!

Until the global software application platforms start recognizing their short effective lifetime, all the leadership of those companies are, only very effective thieves of global wealth. Their thievery is short-term or long-term. The longer that the long-term thievery continues, then the more destructive results for every aspect of survival for all lifeforms on the planet earth. A few can either make wise choices or terrible choices. So far, the powerful few are making the worst choices imaginable. They very unwittingly don't realize how they are effectively endangering themselves more than the masses of the global population.

The more you support the dysfunctional destructive talking points and their corporate goals based on such bad and unethical business strategy, the more you are effectively supporting the very destruction that you are advertising that you are against. Stop the propaganda maneuvering. That's all you are trying to accomplish. To be blunt: and it's a pretty piss poor attempt at propaganda strategy.

I included a link to Roubini with that little archaeological group from France- that's the starting point to change the dynamics, by using an archeological tool from the 4th century. It would be quite easy for an innovative 3-D printing company to start manufacturing. ETC. ETC. ETC.

fill in the blanks:

this is complex and valid militaristic strategy. It is valid. It needs to be implemented through proper software applications, and community functional dynamic platforms, within functional community telecommunication network systems. This link should be a little bit revealing about propaganda strategizing and the RAND CORP. Again, it is not necessarily bad.

http://csc.asu.edu/wp-content/uploads/pdf/114.pdf

Transparency commitments and obligations need to be community based, not based in the profit motives and personal intent of a powerful few. Of course, that is exactly what you don't want, because then you lose your financial prestige, and control. You- in the generic sense- do NOT deserve it. None of You- again in the generic sense deserve it. It is not your right. It is not your privilege. YOU are just like any other Joe walking down any street that can get knifed, or shot, or slaughtered by any other Joe walking down the street. You just don't want to be included with any rank and file any where on the planet. Unfortunately, or fortunately you are. The "fortunately" is not based on your ability to control access to survival tools, which in 2019 is really only monetized transactional publicly acknowledged receipts of debt, by and really to everyone else on the planet.

https://www.wired.com/story/is-big-tech-merging-with-big-brother-kinda-looks-like-it/

That link about the Chinese social "credit" system is not corrupt. It may not be fun. But it sure is going to keep people like the top 1% toeing the line. The problem is in the implementation of the system by the Chinese political hierarchy. If it is corrupted, it will be corrupt. Then, there will be an increasing number of elite within that system that is "exempt" from any civil obligations. That is just as bad, as FB etc. etc. etc. The game is just as good as the game strategy that has been utilized to play the game. Are you a good chess player, or an under-handed dealer? For the most part, corporate entities today are only under-handed dealers. The chess game got thrown out with the baby a long time ago.

If you corrupt the implementation of the process, the result is a corrupt process. It's pretty BASIC.

The sad fact is that the present political positions globally should not be PAID positions. They are NON-ESSENTIAL, even more NON-ESSENTIAL than the lower paying positions that are being eliminated. The sad fact is that the present CEO positions should NOT be paid at such disproportionate levels. None of these positions deserve to be positions of greater theft, because the thieves can get away with it, just because they can. There is a basic level of RIGHT and WRONG. If you want to cross all of those levels; If you want to deny those levels of RIGHT and WRONG as not relevant, and do not apply, then fine, you get the corruption that you are participating in by your choices.

You will be the one to ultimately suffer. I am fighting you. I am telling you, that you are wrong. I am telling you that I do not believe you. There are no open societies. There are cultures that have developed over generations. There are many different kinds of societies, and states. They are location based. There is no one great open egalitarian society, where everyone is a pie-in-the-sky-animated cartoon. Quite selling fantasy land. Address the real issues of buying and selling land, water lines, sewers, fiber-optic infrastructures etc. etc. Quit selling some free-love game that is not a free-love game, it is a dirty corrupting game. OK, so you tried and got your ego attacked. You aren't stupid. Quit playing the oh-woe-is-me scenario. You are more than a big boy in the neighborhood. Do some real redevelopment somewhere. Roll up your shirt sleeves and find a shovel.Dig a latrine somewhere for someone who can use it.

In other words, you need to put your money in to others hands without telling anybody what they have to do with it. Especially, if you never deserved the money to begin with, because you have not earned the money. What can you actually do? What can you actually do for yourself? Can you raise your own food? Do you even know how to germinate a seed? Do you even know what seed will even germinate? ETC. ETC. ETC. How many judges have you manipulated to do your bidding?

Bottomline, start being honest. Your Open Society Foundations do not have the right to replace local governments. You are an independent sovereign living above and exempt of any national or international laws that is assuming the right to over-rule people, and state governments. You are an elite doing what the hell you want, at the expense of everyone else, because you think you are an exceptional human being, and everyone else is the scum of the earth and should kiss your feet.

I very much doubt if you even wrote the article that is posted on PS.org.
- Watson Brown Jan 26, 2019
  
  you do not think the issues are authoritarian because you are pro beijing
  - Elizabeth Pula Jan 26, 2019
    
    Watson, you have failed to grasp my most elementary level message. My dear Watson, I'm not "pro" anybody or anything, so you obviously haven't noticed much of anything. How did Sherlock ever accomplish anything?
    - Watson Brown Jan 26, 2019
      
      your second paragraph gives your true identity away
      A new reply to this comment has been posted.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Elizabeth Pula Jan 25, 2019

In 2019, there is absolutely no intent to allow any society close to any kind of functional, viable, civil, open societies globally. The only intent is to destroy functional dynamic civil independent states by destroying any integrity for any voting systems, and local community business infrastructures globally. AI is NOT the problem.

It is quite easy to establish local community based dynamic internet platforms that could devour the big 4 quite efficiently and globally. Efficiently diverting all money flows from present usurpers of the global communities functionalities, it just takes focused will to accomplish the tasks.
- Watson Brown Jan 26, 2019
  
  you are pro beijing so civil society issues shouldn't concern you
  - Elizabeth Pula Jan 26, 2019
    
    I really should repeat myself....
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Elizabeth Pula Jan 25, 2019

AI is NOT the threat. The real threat is the disgusting business practices of companies, as exemplified by this one. What a Great business model for 2019 that is indicative of the business model globally. There is no focus on any kind of legitimate business practices or interest in maintaining any attempt to sustain civil society at all!

https://www.revealnews.org/article/facebook-knowingly-duped-game-playing-kids-and-their-parents-out-of-money/

Go shake hands with your buddy, George
- Watson Brown Jan 26, 2019
  
  you are pro beijing so civil society issues shouldn't concern you
  - Elizabeth Pula Jan 26, 2019
    
    I really should repeat myself again, and again.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
lisajrdn8 @gmail.com Jan 25, 2019

I always find Soros commentary important to read. Thanks for posting the piece. It is indeed bleak as the Chinese elite and its people have no organizations that can counter power. This is another sign of an impending dark period, made more difficult for open societies when autocrats and oligarchs have new tools at hand for oppression.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Manu Oquendo Jan 25, 2019

Two recent books on the subject and addressed to unsuspecting readers in what Mr. Soros calls "open societies".

1. Surveillance Valley. 2018. Yasha Levine. Public Affairs
2. The imagineers of war. 2017. Sharon Weinberger. Vintage.

Mr. Soros cannot confuse anybody anylonger.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
robert carter Jan 25, 2019

I have recently visited China after a gap of 15 years, I visited half a dozen provinces and many cities, as well as rural areas, over 37 days. The changes are very impressive In the late evening single women and children may be walking in the streets. Whilst in Xinjiang the police presence was noticeable, there was a feeling of safety, I would confidently walk down a street at night.
I visited places where the local government had rehoused villages in new apartments, and it is my understanding that old peoples recreation centres are starting to be built within 15 minutes walking distance of most older people. I did notice considerable effort had been made to encourage internal tourism, many cities had sculptures, multi coloured lighting on buildings, and in many cities there is dancing in the plazas.
President Xi has talked about building an ecological civilisation, I came to the opinion that the Party is in fact also creating a caring meritocracy. The civil administrators get promoted if they reduce poverty, reduce pollution, provide improved housing, reduce crime and corruption. Failure to do so may result in demotion or more serious penalties.

The statistics on poverty reduction are outstanding whilst the average income is now about 20,000 USD/y, since 1990 800 million people have been lifted out of poverty, and by 2020 it is likely to be eliminated.

I visited a mining company, and asked about the accomodation for the miners. I had seen some pretty grim 2 double decker bunk beds to a room to sleep 4, with single glazing and earth floor in a factory closed in 2014. The factory Manager told me that now his miners expect and get individual rooms with hot and cold water, television and air conditioning. As were talking I could hear drumming so I asked about it, and was invited to see. There were about 20 huge drums in a corner of giant hall with sports courts as well as what looked like dining area at the far end. Each drum had a young woman, they were going through a dance routine as they drummed. I was told they were practicing for the Spring Festival, two months away, and that all employees were coming to a party.

During one day I was driven in a car by a policeman, and remarked that his driving was both slower and more careful than the taxi and other drivers, this was to me strange. When I commented , it was explained to me that he had to obey all rules and really set the standard.

I came away with the view that whilst the Society in China is authoritative, that a society is being built that is both fair and caring, that the rules are clear. The discussion at the dining tables was open, for instance about recovering Taiwan. My view on Taiwan is that shortly they will be applying to join the rest of China due to better living standards.

Whilst my some of my usual websites were sometimes unavailable and I could not use some search engines, other search engines were effective and I had good access to my local and World News.

Not everything was wonderful, the Chinese have copied Western transport systems, public transport such as subways, bullet trains and airports are better, but the road traffic was every bit as bad as any Western city, whilst the cars kept moving often it was much less than 50km/h. Smoking is quite normal and accepted, even by district administrators, which suggests that health care is largely private, that there is little government interest in providing universal public health at the present time.

I also inadvertently over stayed on my visa 7 days, this was picked up at the internal hongkong/mainland border. This resulted in being passed to senior officers' who pointed out my mistake, escorted by an officer to a corridor and told to sit. After about an hour, I was told I had not obeyed the rules and had committed an offence, that I was being released with no penalty but that next time I would get a big fine. It was worrying but fair, interpretation of the rules are pretty black and white. On some airlines not only you are told to switch your cell phones off but if you don't you will be severely punished. (In practice the stewardesses went and nicely made sure). Drunk drivers get an automatic 5 days in Jail, this applies to anybody.

Confucianism harmony is an alternative to liberal Western political thought, a variant has been demonstrated in Singapore on a small scale, the Chinese are now demonstrating the value on a huge scale, perhaps Popper was wrong in discounting Plato.

On the conflict with the USA, neither China or Russia accept the idea that the USA is exceptional. The danger is as the USA pivots to Asia that the Chinese in reaction become increasingly militarised. I think it is fair to say that Russian military technology and ability to project power has improved in reaction to the expansion of Nato, that Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union has been treated as an adversary. That had we instead assisted and integrated Russia into Europe, that it would likely be much more democratic.
To avoid sanctions and containment China has built islands and claimed the South China sea. The problem is that on present trends the Chinese economy will by 2030 be double the size of that of the USA. Already twice as many patents are being produced in China versus the USA, whilst the number of stem graduates is currently 5 (or 8?) times that of the USA with a prediction that this will rise to 15. Simply put, China is out thinking the USA, in the long run the West is not competitive. Treated fairly, with understanding of their culture and national interests, with international cooperation, we could have harmonious relationship.
The way they are currently treated, to try to impose Soros's concept of an open society, to try to restrict their technological development is likely to backfire. Huawei may have had a relationship with the Chinese military, but for example Google was initially helped by the DIA. In any case even Western computer technology is not perfect, inadvertent backdoors are frequently found, our own technology is a security risk!
Hostility to President Xi is counter productive, and polarizing, and will probably lead to a closing of the ranks. If we wish China to be a benevolent regional or global hedgemon we should welcome them into the international fold.
My observations lead me to conclude that the Party realizes that it exists to serve the populace, that its existence depends on public support, and that in the context of their history which is hierarchical and authoritative that a meritocracy is evolving that will provide better long-term government than what we have currently in the USA and the UK.
- Elizabeth Pula Feb 10, 2019
  
  "My observations lead me to conclude that the Party realizes that it exists to serve the populace, that its existence depends on public support, and that in the context of their history which is hierarchical and authoritative that a meritocracy is evolving that will provide better long-term government than what we have currently in the USA and the UK."
  Of course, I don't know if you wrote your remarks, or if the remarks are Chinese propaganda. However, regardless, I find much validity in the conclusion. What is significant is that: "it exists to serve the populace". It is extremely difficult to stay true to that path with so many human beings in positions to direct activities of so many other human beings. No nation ever pursues the path successfully in the best way all the time. However, in acknowledging the historical longevity of China as a nation, people, and culture, China has accomplished, and is accomplishing the most good for the most people, especially in 2019.
  
  I don't know if I would be very successful as a Chinese citizen, and I sure would not have wanted to be living in China during so much of the social conflict in the 50's and later. However, the Chinese political operations as a system has accomplished much for its people, that is historically significant. It takes a lot of cooperative work effort by a lot of human beings to allow so many human beings to develop in a somewhat peaceful society.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Matthew Howard Jan 25, 2019

There are several similar cases of the US saddling developing countries with purposely large loans for construction of infrastructure projects with little likelihood of them ever being able to repay the debt, resulting in the extraction of its resources and providing political support to US interests, where needed.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Stefan Ianta Jan 25, 2019

Computationally speaking, a global open society operating on an universal smart market/Internet standard will outperform on long term any of its subgroups - even a billion people economy.
Some of the cyber-superpowers might lead the AI developments until a decentralized (open society) social-AI OS will be available for the vast majority of the people on the Internet.
In my opinion, the opportunity would rather be to focus the efforts of the open society and global open source communities to build a decentralized AI economy/OS for the 4 billion people on the internet.
That will enable international cooperation and progress at the highest possible social speed.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Petey Bee Jan 25, 2019

Ironically, this editorial appears to be self-censored due to the paywall.

AI, big-data, etc will make it easier for all societies to exercise more control over individuals. The likely outcome is that all our governments will drift in a more oppressive direction.

While it's true that among the great powers, China shows the least hesitation in this regard, I am far more concerned about the society in which I live (the US), and the ones that I could plausibly move to if the worst came to pass (the EU).

For the US, a program to alter Chinese government and "free its people" would consume enormous resources, and the side effect of any such confrontation would necessarily be increased militarism at home. To that, I say, thanks but no thanks.

In reality, the positive "open-society" aspects of the US already started slipping, starting with Bush's "war on terror". The threat increased with the Trump administration, obviously. The Democrats' response was hardly comforting - a panicked embrace of a national security state who shares none of their values.

Encouraging the US government to go on a China crusade would, in practice, give the national security state a moral blank check to undermine still more of what is worth preserving about the US.

I'd rather the effort went into making this place a happy and prosperous place to live - with the goods fairly distributed for all. The resources to fix *this* place are available, they always were. While Chinese technological repression is regrettable, focus on that is badly misguided, in my opinion.
- Jason H Jan 25, 2019
  
  It's not a paywall as it's free to sign up.
  - Petey Bee Jan 25, 2019
    
    Quoth the website:
    "We hope you're enjoying Project Syndicate.
    Unfortunately, you've already read your two free premium PS articles this month. To continue reading, subscribe now."
    
    Quoth the javascript:
    [p] [div] [class="paywall"] etc etc
    - Elizabeth Pula Feb 10, 2019
      
      All of the articles aren't premium, etc. The paywall is the new "global" divide.
      
      Pretty soon, anyone will be lucky to even be able to open any old documents on your own computer, that you wrote yourself, on your own computer using any text process tool.
      
      Microsoft is going to 365 subscriptions, If you no longer have an active subscription, all old .doc files will be "read only".
      
      Now, depending on legislation, the implications are quite frightening for the present and future generations to read, or write anything, even if you are the originating author, at home, on your own computer.
      A new reply to this comment has been posted.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Elizabeth Pula Jan 24, 2019

Just finished reading Pence's October 4th, 2018 statement on US policy towards China. It's an interesting parallel propaganda talking point typical speech that has been regurgitated through many administrations. It pretty much matches point for point, any counter policy speech written for the Chinese by the Chinese, that I could imagine.

The one paragraph that I find especially disturbing as a biased US citizen, only concerned with my own personal day-to-day survival, is this:

"Our administration will continue to act decisively to protect American interests, American jobs, and American security."

It would have been nice if at least that sentence had some validity. It does NOT. If it did, there would not presently be a US government shutdown, nor 80,000 or whatever number of "workers" working as SLAVE LABOR in the US.

I'd say that the Oct. 4, 2018 statement has about as much credibility as any North Korean public policy statement, or Chinese public policy statement, which is the understatement for any US public foreign policy statement written by anyone, for anyone else to read anywhere. What a shame.

Soros, if neither you nor those public policy stakeholders can come up with anything better in the arena of "credibility", then neither you nor they have accomplished much of anything during your lifetimes. You may want to start addressing the fact that you and quite a few others only consider an "open society" to be a herded and confined labor pool at the lowest price level imaginable, with the least amount of survivability, so the few can increasingly profit at the comparative increasing detriment of the many.

In other words, you want exactly what the Chinese want, total subjugation of the masses everywhere.
- Watson Brown Jan 26, 2019
  
  you don't like pence's speech because you are pro beijing. Simple really.
  - Elizabeth Pula Jan 26, 2019
    
    No. That's not quite my elementary message Watson. I don't like Pence's speech because he is propagandizing exactly like the Chinese. You did not grasp the most elementary point of my comment Watson.
    - Elizabeth Pula Jan 26, 2019
      
      Watson, I'll get a bit serious here. Soros, just like many others through the years have pursued and attempted to contribute to improve legal systems, and community systems. However, due to changes in the processing of messaging publicly, due to changes in the implementation of new communication applications, and due to changes in governmental systems due to erosion, decay, or corruption of old-governmental systems based on political positions and communication processes, the desired results, no matter if they were idealistic, appropriate, or inappropriate are not occurring and producing results, that the very same initiators had hoped (or not hoped). The results in 2019 are reflected in the turmoil that is obvious by the behavior and interpretations of human behavior globally.
      
      Depending upon each individual's predicament in society, in 2019, there are really billions of "views" that are probably all valid in one way or another. However, views, and opinions do not resolve any of the problems that reveal the dysfunctional operations, and reality of many states, examined as cohesive operating-units, globally today.
      
      The general dysfunction that all of us are experiencing is occurring in every nation, globally. Some nations are going to be able to survive as nations-states, others will not. The nation-
      states of tomorrow will not necessarily be structured, or organized as any of the nation-states that exist today, or yesterday.
      
      It's just history repeating itself. Although I prefer my story, and I'm sticking to it. That's an underhanded pun. I'll make myself really clear here, and write "her story". Just to keep my message kinda elementary, my dear Watson.
      - Watson Brown Jan 26, 2019
        
        irrelevant. i was talking about pence not soros.
        
        A new reply to this comment has been posted.
      A new reply to this comment has been posted.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Keith Roberts Jan 24, 2019

This is a very bleak commentary, with its slim hope resting on an apparently non-existant attachment to individualism by the Chinese people. Perhaps a better model would be the fate of Russia under Yeltsin, except this time without the terrible mistakes! No Boris, no oligarchs stealing the public’s assets, no Jeffrey Sachs providing awful advice.
- Boris Molina Jan 25, 2019
  
  Jeffrey Sachs is still providing terrible advice: this time about China and the US! Did you read his posts in the SCMP or the FT recently?
  - Watson Brown Jan 26, 2019
    
    Advice for China and the US? No it's just the US. Sachs's idea to make america great again is to model america on china
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
nigel southway Jan 24, 2019

This comment was removed by a moderator. Replies to this comment may also be deleted. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

http://prosyn.org/TOgxeru;

Long Reads

The AI Threat to Open Societies

To continue reading, subscribe now.

New Comment

Email this piece to a friend

Contact us

The Road From Thatcherism

Resilience and Rebellion in Contemporary China

Are Multinationals Eclipsing Nation-States?

Our Increasingly Fascist Public Discourse

Cookies and Privacy

Log in/Register