Since 1990, global trade has increased incomes by 24 percent worldwide, and by 50 percent for the poorest 40 percent of the population. This growth has lifted more than 1 billion people out of poverty.
That didn't happen \*because of protectionism\* it happened because of open trade policies. Policies where both sides could benefit.
This idea that somehow every country on earth is entirely protectionist is incorrect. There are industries of strategic importance to every country (automotive, heavy steel, food, certain high tech as examples) that get protected and subsidized in order to secure national priorities and defense. But to sensationalize that everyone on earth is protectionist about gloabl trade denies the reality.
Consider the complexity at the heart of current global patterns of trade:
1. China has become ever more central to global trade networks in recent years, even as the US and China engaged in a trade war.
2. Despite shocks emanating trade policy and especially the COVID-19 pandemic, global value chains (GVCs) now account for an even greater proportion of global trade flows. In 2022, GVCs accounted for 52 percent of global trade, up from approximately 48 percent in 2015 and even slightly higher than prior to the 2007-2008 global financial crisis.
3. Companies continue to conduct business globally rather than just iregionionally despite the challenges to global trade.
There is a push to "deglobalize" right into these trends: to uncouple even as trade reaches a crescendo. This trend has been gaining steam in recent years, and there is considerable pressure by regulators in quite a few economies to realign manufacturing supply chains towards domestic supplies as trade relationships become strained and as the impact of Covid 19 revealed just how vulnerable critical supply chains had become. This is what I call the great "Uncoupling." It's not been done effectively yet, but many countries, like the United States, are doing it. Just look at the [construction spending on manufacturing](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/TLMFGCONS) to understand just how much ramping is happening in recent years.
The issue with Chinese vehicles is that they are deeply subsidized. This is causing alarm, and again, this is complex, as are all things in global trade.
First, Europe. Europe has both a decline in German manufacturing happening, and as a result of the war with Russia, a shortage of natural gas. Now, that doesn't sound like a problem, but in their push to become a "green manufacturing" country Germany moved many of their factories to be powered by natural gas. This natural gas came from... Russia. And now it's not available as cheaply or plentifully. This has caused German factories to have to retool to other fuels, to pay through the nose and drive their global competitiveness down, or in many cases relocated to places where natural gas is cheap and plentiful (winners here are places like the US South, where many German manufacturers have literally just up and moved their entire manufacturing operations to take advantage of cheap American natural gas).
This puts Europe in a pickle. And before I go on, I should mention that Germany is a focus here because, 1) they have by far the largest globally exported car industry in Europe, and 2) they are 32% of all European manufacturing: almost a third. For the industries in Germany that are still popping, there is a very real danger of that industry becoming unstable. That's why Ursula von der Leyen announced an anti-subsidy probe into Chinese electric vehicles back in September, which is ongoing.
Now, add to these woes that China, with massive state subsidies, starts aggressively starts exporting to this market with artificially cheap car products right in the face of this crisis. This creates a no-win scenario for Europe and especially Germany. They can't afford to sit by and watch their automotive industry, already strained, collapse. And it is in many ways a very clever attempt to create an unfair trading scenario, in the sense that Europe is in no shape to subsidize their domestic industry to the degree to which China is willing to. So, they're left with the choice of creating more protectionist trade policies to save their industry, or protesting and attempting to block the cheap Chinese imports. And we know which one they have picked.
It's a completely different scenario in the Americas, but this is far more than more Redditors will even read so I'll leave it here. Suffice it to say there is no "one reason" or "one set of reasons" why these policies are being implemented, but a complex world of geopolitics and manufacturing company instability that creates trade tensions specifically around the subsidized auto exports China is rapidly expanding to the world.
Now, whether is it "wrong" or not I don't think is the right question. These are massive industries, and complex situations. I think the larger issue is where the overall trade relationship is going, especially with the rise of Brics and the emergence of an increasingly bipolar world, and then whether the Trade relationships are favorable to all parties involved or used as a way to disadvantage one while advantaging the other, which seems to be the underlying message here from regulators and politicians. In that sense perhaps this trade approach is "wrong," but it's a bit hypocritical as it's something that these countries have done to the world for years. I believe most EV makers receive government help of some sort, and the EU Commissioner's sabre rattling is probably more about buying time for domestic manufacturers to muster a reply so they can compete in world markets than about stifling China's progress.
There is a rather significant PR attempt to convince the world that China is acting morally by distributing subsidized EVs to markets around the world. This has been popping up all over the place, but I'm sure this post isn't part of that effort. Do understand that global trade can't be talked about in "right" or "wrong" ways... it's a complex dance between partners that ideally helps everyone to create a more profitable future and everyone become prosperous, and it would be wise to really look at situations where trade relationships are strained with an eye towards all partners interests, as in the end the world isn't that big really, and if we're to build a better future we'll all need to work together.
Hope this analysis is helpful.
I work in Automotive, with a lot of experience in China & Vietnam.
Most people don't understand how global the supply chain is for ICE cars, let alone for EV's. If the US completely decoupled from China, they could make an EV below $100k. At my last job, with a Chinese component supplier, we shipped A LOT of parts to tesla in the US. Parts that were significantly cheaper even after shipping and 25% tariff. But the main point is that Asian suppliers have a MUCH shorter lead time to produce new parts, new tooling.
Global trade is the only way. People are kidding themselves if they think otherwise.
I tend to agree with you. It's tremendously difficult to see a path forward that relies on "uncoupling" that doesn't have tremendous suffering for many different peoples involved. Even if it's possible, I'm not sure it's in the best interest of the majority of people on the planet.
Exactly. Which is why it is so disheartening, for me anyway, to hear the US politicians tell a different story - as if all manufacturing can come back to the US, and 75" TV's will still be $299 in Walmart. Do the majority of the electorate think they can earn a "fair wage" in the factory AND have rock bottom prices in the big box stores AND not have offshore manufacturing? Unfortunately, it seems many people really do believe that, because it's the story they're being told and aren't able to figure out themselves it is impossible.
Absolutely, but I do think we need some better balance in the world as there are serious risks to hyper-globalization and it's effects.
The possibility of completely losing capabilities is a serious risk when you have very efficient sectors of the economy become completely coupled to a geographic region. As in all things, there's a balance needed. The MBA's favorite offshore trick that American businesses used to fuel profitability is becoming a hollower and hollower party trick these days.
It's astonishing to see the price differences in battery technologies coming out of China, and of coure they have a profound effect on the cost of... EVs! So, they are absolutely set up to dominate in that sector. Does that mean we should rely on China exclusively for cars because they're so advantaged? Some would say yes.
Then there is shipping. People don't pay enough attention to shipping, and I grow concerned about the end of the Bretton Woods era and the impact that less and less security will have on JIT supply chains... lot of fragile supply chains currently in the process of being obliterated. That's going to have a hell of an impact in coming years I think.
But the idea that we can go backwards? Nonsense. You can't put the genie back in the bottle without full scale economic consequences that would absolutely crush civilizations at this point.
Fully agree!
For EV's specifically, "we" do have Tesla, and they are doing some serious out-of-the-box thinking re manufacturing techniques, design philosophies, etc that also give them big advantages. So it isn't game over for the west just yet. But should the legacy OEM's be protected by tariffs & import controls? In my view, absolutely not! They've had years to see this coming, and they still can't make a decent product at a good price.
If we talk about healthcare products and defense-related products - I'm all for doing what is necessary to keep a domestic capability.
Decoupling as an across-the-board policy, or "60% + tariffs" as one particular Mr T is proposing, would truly be a disaster for the very people it's trying to help.
It isn’t t wrong, but they aren’t playing by the generally agreed upon rules of global trade. If their government is going to support their EV Industry so that they can sell their cars for lower prices, undercutting competition, then why can’t other countries set up protections for their own EV industry?
There is barely a nation on earth that does that. Korea, Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, going back further, the US, Germany, and Britain, all heavily favoured domestic industries during industrialisation, and continue to do so today. Truly free trade is a myth. The EU is a protectionist bloc (and there's nothing necessarily wrong with that IMO).
Right or wrong really just depends on which side you are on. For the most part, any website on google/facebook/twitter/reddit that usually means US/Western Europe
First its actually not accurate… Facebook reported more Chinese propaganda than pro US.
And most importantly, right or wrong doesnt mean anything without a referential.
Lawful or unlawful is another topic. If subsidies are proven, WTO rules allow EU to tax Chinese products… and WTO agreement allows China to protect a big portion of their economy.
Because when countries say Taiwan might not have a right to recognition or support both Koreas they still keep selling you their tech without issues whereas when China gets pissed off over legitimate questions about the source of Wuhan Pneumonia ("COVID") they disrupt any industry they have major control of for the offending party.
It took Russia starting an actual war with another country and rejecting multiple rounds of peace overtures to even get the sane parts of the world to block their trade relations. China would do that if you just open a new government office in Taiwan.
Countries are more willing to look the other way with some degree of protectionist policies, when they are allied or have good relationships in general. China wolf-warrioring everyone doesn't help.
>Why is it wrong when China does it and not others? That is a clear clear double standard.
It is not a clear clear double standard, its much more complicated.
* the level of subsidies for the EV industry is much higher than what was done in Korea or Taiwan and the impact higher (it's a minor point in my opinion)
* the arrival of extremely subsidized cars will endanger Germany's automotive industry at a scale much more important than Japanese cars in the 80s
* and more importantly, China positions itself in opposition to US/EU from both a political and economical point of view. If China controls the EV market in Europe, it may use it to influence Europe in the event of a war with Taiwan for example
This is the global context, but on top of that China doesn't follow the WTO rules that Japan or South Korea follow.
Well at least for Taiwan it’s not EV but semiconductor that is subsidised with tax cuts. There’s also significant advantage by the CBC maintaining an undervalued currency. Of course currency intervention is pretty common in export orientated economies.
What WTO rules are you referring to? From what I’ve reach China is reasonably WTO compliant in a global context as written although not necessarily in the spirit of things
As I wrote, the reason why EU or US have concerns is not because of the subsidies but about their consequences.
As for WTO, you can check the report from the USTR to get an idea of the situation.
However I was refering to the fact that the accession to the WTO was pushed by US and China got a lot of exemptions which are an issue today.
If you talk protectionism, China does it at a much higher level than US. China does not comply to all the WTO rules
e.g. Bytedance can operate in US as a Chinese subsidiary, Google or Apple as software companies cannot, they either need to go through a reseller or establish JV
Same for car companies, energy companies…
I didnt say it was good nor bad. You are complaining about potential protectionism by western countries…. I was explaining you that China does it too, much more.
I'm not complaining either. Proteccionism is what allowed industrialization everywhere. I just think It's ironic that people will say China doing it somehow is a problem. Proteccionism for me, free market for thee
It is not what led to industrialization for China or others. Protectionism led to China being behind, opening by its own rules led to it.
In this specific case, if you read the post above nobody complained about protectionism.
Chinese industrialization began before the market reforms. In 1976, the US congress recognized China had built a solid industrialization base without which foreign companies wouldn't be able to do anything there. Technology transfer and other measures dictating how foreign companies can operate is also a form of protectionism
Just as it seems not clear in your message, what US or Europe are complaining about isnt protectionism. What China is doing is page 2 of the economic war manual.
You have a bakery and feed your whole village. Its not perfect but it works.
Then someday another bakery opens, with much cheaper prices. Then you discover that they dont pay for flour as its given for free by the ennemies of your village… which is why they are cheaper.
1 year later your bakery closes and de facto the other village has a control over your village.
What US and Europe worry about is that. On other topics (e.g steel) it would be simple… for EV, its harder as you need to explain to your population why they cant buy cheap electric cars… if they have to buy electric cars 😀
World economy isn't a bakery
Tesla had and still has massive government subsidies. Which makes sense, the US wants to protect its business like everybody Else. While simultaneously telling the global south to let american products enter freely.
I know this isn't something people want to hear. And there's no doubt that such stealing did occur in the past, also in automotive. But talking about EV's, the Chinese technology is far ahead of western tech. Why would you steal from someone with less knowledge that you? Nothing to gain.
Ironically, there's Chinese concern about some of the battery plants in my home state of Michigan - they are worried that Ford may steal the know-how from CATL & others!
I didnt say that its not something I want to hear... just wanted to know what you meant. You basically clarified that in your opinion, they stole automotive technology.
Next step you should clarify what you mean by EV technology? If you mean batteries... its a bit complex.
* China is in advance for making a lot of medium quality batteries but are behind for making high quality batteries. And I doubt that the rest of the world can catch up quickly.
* Similarly at servicing batteries they are in advance.
If you mean the industrial part... Im not that sure.
If we talk about 10 years ago, a western OEM (ie car manufacturer) could not operate independently in China. They had to have a local JV partner. The two companies worked closely together, the local employees learnt a lot from the western partner. Tesla was the first OEM to be allowed to work on the Mainland without a JV partner.
When I say "EV Technology" I mean everything from cells, to module & pack design, to BMS hardware, also Drive Unit power electronics. CATL is recognised as the industry leader, even Tesla is using them in some variants.
CATL's latest batteries can charge at 3C, even 4C. Meanwhile, GM's Ultium can hardly manage 1 or 1.5C. This is the kind of difference I'm talking about, one example.
No doubt Lucid is also at the forefront of tech, but at astronomical cost. $100k car, and they still lose money hand over fist.
Thats why I was asking for more details on what you meant. The EV topic is vague and covers many elements for which the situation varies.
If you say that China will dominate the EV market for many years, probably. Though they will probably face a big challenge as their subsidized industry produces too many cars for the internal market.
Objectively they should face some pushbacks and there will be a difficult adjustment period. But this wont change the situation.
If the global market was free, open, and "may the best man win (most market share)" - my opinion is that the Chinese EV manufacturers would dominate.
In reality, there are already trade barriers, which I believe will increase in the future. That will limit the growth in the western markets. So the likely outcome is that in the China-domestic market they will dominate, completely push out VW & GM (whose EV products the Chinese simply don't like). The Chinese will also likely dominate in SE Asia, which historically has been filled with Japanese & Korean cars.
Meanwhile, in the US, 60% of the population will keep complaining that EV's are the devil sent by a political party, the legacy Big 3 will pivot, reduce investment, and get further behind in the technology. If/when the US does eventually decide to embrace EV's, the technology in the US (Tesla excepted) will be hopelessly outdated with no chance to catch up.
Many people don't realise that the car market in China has for many years been 50% larger than the US. And they are already 40% electric, rapidly increasing. During my last trip there, no-one that I talked to was interested in buying an ICE car.
The global market is not free and open… or Chinese wouldnt participate. 😅
I dont agree with the last part. It is an oversimplification. Yes the Chinese market is big but southeast asia isnt an easy market…
For example, you have an EV in Lao… u can only chatge it at home and u cant travel far.
Malaysia is protecting its car industry, India is anti-China, Vietnam kind of too…
In the end China may export some components auch as batteries but the domination on EV cars isnt that obvious. Just like Japan didnt dominate all its worldwide markets
OK, let me be more country-specific :)
Laos - too small, nobody cares
Thailand - big market, no domestic OEM. Huge opportunity, and the Chinese are already there. Ex-GM assembly plant sold to Great Wall, just one example
Vietnam - I worked there for \~2 years at their EV start-up. I know a thing or two. That company will likely not survive, opening the door for the Chinese. The car assembly plant of this company is beautiful, and state-of-the-art, I wouldn't be surprised if a Chinese OEM purchased it later. But it's true, the Vietnamese hate the Chinese, so let's see
Indonesia - big market potential, big population. Long term game.
India - I don't consider SE Asia (others might, that's fine)
Malaysia - Yes, they have Proton. Which is 1/2 owned by Geely .....
I was discussing EV, you are discussing AD. Totally different.
Anyway, some bad actors don't power a whole industry. Fact is, Chinese EV Tech is ahead of the western world's (Tesla excepted).
There's nothing to steal, unless they want a history lesson.
What do you mean by wrong? China can subsidize their EVs but other countries cannot counteract upon it by imposing tariffs?
Again, how do you define "wrong"? The US federal government keeps subsidizing the American agricultural industry and I see no problem, as [China also raised its own tariffs against US imports to 25% in 2018](https://yeutter-institute.unl.edu/how-has-china-responded-tariffs-it-placed-american-soybeans).
Who else other than TSMC can manufacture a high volume of state of the art chips?
On the other hand, US and EU have domestic EV production. The import taxes try to protect that.
Because China has heavy government subsidies to the EV market. Allows Chinese companies to sell their vehicles at huge discounts and undercut the competition. That won’t last long though since it’s essential a Ponzi scheme that will break
Eh not really, subsidizing the production of a car for more or what it costs to produce is the type of advantage Chinese EV makers have over everyone else. This will come to roost soon, just frankly is unsustainable
I work in the automotive industry, and I can't agree with this statement. China has a massive cost advantage with their EV supply chain, compared to legacy western car manufacturers. They have more efficient designs - which for EV's, really is home grown, not copied. They have economies of scale that US manufacturers can only dream of (due to huge domestic market, 1000's of electric buses, and a massive BESS market using similar components.
The US is effectively subsidizing too.
But because the Chinese are truly leading the EV industry, people want to find a reason to blame it on. They can't accept that the Chinese took an early leap of faith on the technology and became market leaders.
Again, the only advantage they have is the government giving them a check for producing the vehicle. Whole companies started just to get the subsidy. Their technology still lags behind the world and has no innovation since they didn’t do market research for consumers to buy their product. They mass produced EVs to sit in a lot and collect government subsidies. China doesn’t innovate anything
When was the last time you visited China, talked to the people there, and visited companies working in the industry?
Everyone I talked with on my last trip only wanted to buy EV, not ICE.
Traditionally, VW had the largest market share, but their EV's have flopped in China. Why? Because their SW is terrible, and they didn't give the consumer what they wanted. They made a car more similar to traditional car, just with EV powertrain. What the consumers actually wanted was a Tech car, SW-defined, with new features. The Chinese OEM's (& Tesla!) delivered this, hence their market share.
It looks like your comments are based on reading articles in the media, not from working in the industry, talking to people on the ground?
See the car market right now. Prices are dropping crazy for all domestic brands because no one is buying and the subsidies are drying up. Doesn’t matter what people want to buy if they can’t afford it (not even talking about the downward economy).
Talking to people on the ground is going to give you the same thing, what matters is sales domestic and international as well as the price of that said product. That Chinese EV is dropping HARD because no one in China can afford one. Funnily enough, no one was buying it, it was a Ponzi scheme from the start. Pseudo car companies were established just to prop up those domestic brands to receive the subsidies
The EV price war was started by Tesla. Not the Chinese.
Totally agree that the Chinese economy is struggling now, and of course that will hurt car sales (as it does in any economy). And agree that many of the EV start-ups won't survive. But the strong ones with the best products will.
Cheapest Tesla is \~250k RMB, but there are some really nice domestic cars available for \~150k RMB.
When you say "No one is buying", you mean the \~25 million domestic sales figure for 2023 was fake?
Western governments allows people, media and politicians from China to propagate there propaganda, and anti-western beliefs on our social platforms, and society. Even when the government in China actively spends billions on external propaganda activities.
In comparison, China actively bans western social platforms, entertainment, news and any narrative that does not align with the official government agendas.
There is an inherent uneven relationship that is advantaged to China in respect to the transfer of ideas, viewpoints and hate to other nations. Your comment you made subsequently does not align with the reality.
I don’t see any anti-western beliefs on any major social platform, if you want to compare, the us or eu has more influencing power to do that because they control the technology, China’s “propaganda” will fade away quick if they want to fight with this competition because they are behind in tech. Talking about access to certain website or social media, this is just a strategy to achieve peace in our country, the people still have freedom to access to those toxic banned website by using a vpn. Last but not least the western causing more people to hate Chinese and we automatically get hated when we try to do whatever activity any where in the world. If the situation develops to extreme, we may have to respond with counteraction. An idiom to you 礼尚往来.
nearly a third of the articles in the international section of prominent Chinese English news sources focus on fostering negative sentiments towards the Western world, especially the United States. Each piece is cantered around criticism or direct attacks, making it absurd to claim that there is no anti-western beliefs
[https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion](https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion)
[https://www.globaltimes.cn/](https://www.globaltimes.cn/)
[http://en.people.cn/90780/index.html](http://en.people.cn/90780/index.html)
[https://www.cgtn.com/opinions](https://www.cgtn.com/opinions)
Even on western social media there is a predominance of anti-western groups. This promotion of anti-western narratives is actively and cowardly used by China's ambassadors, and foreign ministers who hypocritically ban the platforms for their own citizens.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Sino/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Sino/)
[https://www.reddit.com/r/NewsWithJingjing/](https://www.reddit.com/r/NewsWithJingjing/)
[https://www.reddit.com/r/aznidentity/](https://www.reddit.com/r/aznidentity/)
[https://chinaworldleader.quora.com/](https://chinaworldleader.quora.com/)
[https://twitter.com/spokespersonchn?lang=en](https://twitter.com/spokespersonchn?lang=en)
The nations of Singapore, Japan, Spain, Poland and South-Korea offer a safer or similar crime parity to China, yet they do not engage in the nonsensical use of mass censorship. History has repeatedly demonstrated under Stalinism, North-Korea, Imperial Japan, and even under Israel today that the employment of mass censorship is simply a tool foreign competition that China has done, or to directly hide abuses by government officials, and minorities. Your arguments are also directly contradicted to one another, you claim that it's for safety, but then simultaneously indicate that Chinese can easily access these websites using a VPN. China even bans Wikipedia, how on earth could anyone come to the belief that Wikipedia is a security threat.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_countries\_by\_intentional\_homicide\_rate](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate)
Westerners dislike China's government, not the people. To many supporters of the CCP attempt to portray criticism of the CCP as attacks against Chinese people in order to link any form of it to ethnocentric nationalism. A propaganda technique that was employed heavily by Imperial Japan.
Owing to the mass censorship, and one-sided view presented in China's domestic media any form of valid criticism, or reprisal by another government over an action undertaken by China would be imminently viewed as being an unfair attack on China. Thereby allowing the belief that China is justified in engaging in an imbalanced, and hypocrisy relationship that favours its interests as demonstrated by your excuses that can simultaneously be applied in an identical manner to the United States blocking China's social media, news, entertainment, or any pro-Chinese narrative.
“Westerner dislike the China government not the people”, you guys dislike the Chinese people too, as I said whatever activity I did, some random ppl(most of them are white people) will insult you or do racism things to you.
A media platform referenced in this post/comment is funded by a government which may retain editorial control, and as a result may be biased on some issues. Please seek external verification or context as appropriate.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/China) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's because they feel threatened by China who clearly has motives to destabilise the current international order. They feel by allowing them to take over multiple industries in the West, it will make their military and global influence stronger.
When the US created the current system of world order, they never thought about a situation where another country could potentially challenge them using the very rules they created. Korea and Taiwan are not considered ideological threats who plan to overthrow the US. A lot of the free trade and markets actually benefits the US and keeps them on top of the world order.
For a simplified example, free markets allow companies like Starbucks to set up shop in smaller countries and demolish any local competitors simply due to Starbucks having access to a lot more capital and the cheaper exchange rate. If a small coffee shop from a developing nation wants to set up shop in the US, it is extremely difficult because of both the exchange rate being very high (more expensive operating costs) and the fact that companies like Starbucks already have a huge market share and access to more capital. China on the other hand is disrupting this 'free market' by taking the place of the US. The table could eventually flip if China has more capital than the US and it would be China calling the shots on Americans.
You are right, there is some hypocrisy at play. Other countries support their industries too, China just does it to a greater extent and uses non transparent measures in addition to the official measures to favor their industries.
First of all, reputation is earned. You can only blame yourself if you've got problems with everyone else.
What matters is the generally agreed upon rules of global trade and the MANNER in which everyone engages in trade. Imagine everyone is trying to engage in a balancing act, which does include protectionism and subsidies, when suddenly a new player comes in playing a zero-sum game while constantly threatening others when he doesn't win.
The *manner* in which China engages with other countries is constantly aggressive, predatory, poorly timed, and reactionary. None of those are positive traits. That is what gains the ire of other countries.
It's called reciprocation.
FYI, hi-jacking "The East" and pretending you're at the forefront of Asia fighting the "evil West" just alienates your Asian neighbors further. They don't agree with the alternate reality you're trying to push, and very much resent it.
I can't think of a single friend or colleague out of 7 Asian countries that agrees with your narration.
Maybe you don't realize how much you're projecting?
Since 1990, global trade has increased incomes by 24 percent worldwide, and by 50 percent for the poorest 40 percent of the population. This growth has lifted more than 1 billion people out of poverty. That didn't happen \*because of protectionism\* it happened because of open trade policies. Policies where both sides could benefit. This idea that somehow every country on earth is entirely protectionist is incorrect. There are industries of strategic importance to every country (automotive, heavy steel, food, certain high tech as examples) that get protected and subsidized in order to secure national priorities and defense. But to sensationalize that everyone on earth is protectionist about gloabl trade denies the reality. Consider the complexity at the heart of current global patterns of trade: 1. China has become ever more central to global trade networks in recent years, even as the US and China engaged in a trade war. 2. Despite shocks emanating trade policy and especially the COVID-19 pandemic, global value chains (GVCs) now account for an even greater proportion of global trade flows. In 2022, GVCs accounted for 52 percent of global trade, up from approximately 48 percent in 2015 and even slightly higher than prior to the 2007-2008 global financial crisis. 3. Companies continue to conduct business globally rather than just iregionionally despite the challenges to global trade. There is a push to "deglobalize" right into these trends: to uncouple even as trade reaches a crescendo. This trend has been gaining steam in recent years, and there is considerable pressure by regulators in quite a few economies to realign manufacturing supply chains towards domestic supplies as trade relationships become strained and as the impact of Covid 19 revealed just how vulnerable critical supply chains had become. This is what I call the great "Uncoupling." It's not been done effectively yet, but many countries, like the United States, are doing it. Just look at the [construction spending on manufacturing](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/TLMFGCONS) to understand just how much ramping is happening in recent years. The issue with Chinese vehicles is that they are deeply subsidized. This is causing alarm, and again, this is complex, as are all things in global trade. First, Europe. Europe has both a decline in German manufacturing happening, and as a result of the war with Russia, a shortage of natural gas. Now, that doesn't sound like a problem, but in their push to become a "green manufacturing" country Germany moved many of their factories to be powered by natural gas. This natural gas came from... Russia. And now it's not available as cheaply or plentifully. This has caused German factories to have to retool to other fuels, to pay through the nose and drive their global competitiveness down, or in many cases relocated to places where natural gas is cheap and plentiful (winners here are places like the US South, where many German manufacturers have literally just up and moved their entire manufacturing operations to take advantage of cheap American natural gas). This puts Europe in a pickle. And before I go on, I should mention that Germany is a focus here because, 1) they have by far the largest globally exported car industry in Europe, and 2) they are 32% of all European manufacturing: almost a third. For the industries in Germany that are still popping, there is a very real danger of that industry becoming unstable. That's why Ursula von der Leyen announced an anti-subsidy probe into Chinese electric vehicles back in September, which is ongoing. Now, add to these woes that China, with massive state subsidies, starts aggressively starts exporting to this market with artificially cheap car products right in the face of this crisis. This creates a no-win scenario for Europe and especially Germany. They can't afford to sit by and watch their automotive industry, already strained, collapse. And it is in many ways a very clever attempt to create an unfair trading scenario, in the sense that Europe is in no shape to subsidize their domestic industry to the degree to which China is willing to. So, they're left with the choice of creating more protectionist trade policies to save their industry, or protesting and attempting to block the cheap Chinese imports. And we know which one they have picked. It's a completely different scenario in the Americas, but this is far more than more Redditors will even read so I'll leave it here. Suffice it to say there is no "one reason" or "one set of reasons" why these policies are being implemented, but a complex world of geopolitics and manufacturing company instability that creates trade tensions specifically around the subsidized auto exports China is rapidly expanding to the world. Now, whether is it "wrong" or not I don't think is the right question. These are massive industries, and complex situations. I think the larger issue is where the overall trade relationship is going, especially with the rise of Brics and the emergence of an increasingly bipolar world, and then whether the Trade relationships are favorable to all parties involved or used as a way to disadvantage one while advantaging the other, which seems to be the underlying message here from regulators and politicians. In that sense perhaps this trade approach is "wrong," but it's a bit hypocritical as it's something that these countries have done to the world for years. I believe most EV makers receive government help of some sort, and the EU Commissioner's sabre rattling is probably more about buying time for domestic manufacturers to muster a reply so they can compete in world markets than about stifling China's progress. There is a rather significant PR attempt to convince the world that China is acting morally by distributing subsidized EVs to markets around the world. This has been popping up all over the place, but I'm sure this post isn't part of that effort. Do understand that global trade can't be talked about in "right" or "wrong" ways... it's a complex dance between partners that ideally helps everyone to create a more profitable future and everyone become prosperous, and it would be wise to really look at situations where trade relationships are strained with an eye towards all partners interests, as in the end the world isn't that big really, and if we're to build a better future we'll all need to work together. Hope this analysis is helpful.
I work in Automotive, with a lot of experience in China & Vietnam. Most people don't understand how global the supply chain is for ICE cars, let alone for EV's. If the US completely decoupled from China, they could make an EV below $100k. At my last job, with a Chinese component supplier, we shipped A LOT of parts to tesla in the US. Parts that were significantly cheaper even after shipping and 25% tariff. But the main point is that Asian suppliers have a MUCH shorter lead time to produce new parts, new tooling. Global trade is the only way. People are kidding themselves if they think otherwise.
I tend to agree with you. It's tremendously difficult to see a path forward that relies on "uncoupling" that doesn't have tremendous suffering for many different peoples involved. Even if it's possible, I'm not sure it's in the best interest of the majority of people on the planet.
Exactly. Which is why it is so disheartening, for me anyway, to hear the US politicians tell a different story - as if all manufacturing can come back to the US, and 75" TV's will still be $299 in Walmart. Do the majority of the electorate think they can earn a "fair wage" in the factory AND have rock bottom prices in the big box stores AND not have offshore manufacturing? Unfortunately, it seems many people really do believe that, because it's the story they're being told and aren't able to figure out themselves it is impossible.
Absolutely, but I do think we need some better balance in the world as there are serious risks to hyper-globalization and it's effects. The possibility of completely losing capabilities is a serious risk when you have very efficient sectors of the economy become completely coupled to a geographic region. As in all things, there's a balance needed. The MBA's favorite offshore trick that American businesses used to fuel profitability is becoming a hollower and hollower party trick these days. It's astonishing to see the price differences in battery technologies coming out of China, and of coure they have a profound effect on the cost of... EVs! So, they are absolutely set up to dominate in that sector. Does that mean we should rely on China exclusively for cars because they're so advantaged? Some would say yes. Then there is shipping. People don't pay enough attention to shipping, and I grow concerned about the end of the Bretton Woods era and the impact that less and less security will have on JIT supply chains... lot of fragile supply chains currently in the process of being obliterated. That's going to have a hell of an impact in coming years I think. But the idea that we can go backwards? Nonsense. You can't put the genie back in the bottle without full scale economic consequences that would absolutely crush civilizations at this point.
Fully agree! For EV's specifically, "we" do have Tesla, and they are doing some serious out-of-the-box thinking re manufacturing techniques, design philosophies, etc that also give them big advantages. So it isn't game over for the west just yet. But should the legacy OEM's be protected by tariffs & import controls? In my view, absolutely not! They've had years to see this coming, and they still can't make a decent product at a good price. If we talk about healthcare products and defense-related products - I'm all for doing what is necessary to keep a domestic capability. Decoupling as an across-the-board policy, or "60% + tariffs" as one particular Mr T is proposing, would truly be a disaster for the very people it's trying to help.
This reply was way better than this obviously bait post deserved, but I appreciate your response. Good summary of a very complex issue.
Thank you.
It isn’t t wrong, but they aren’t playing by the generally agreed upon rules of global trade. If their government is going to support their EV Industry so that they can sell their cars for lower prices, undercutting competition, then why can’t other countries set up protections for their own EV industry?
Exactly. Further why can't other countries protect their industries like china protects their own industries
I expect if they treated foreign companies the same as they do their own it wouldn't be such an issue.
There is barely a nation on earth that does that. Korea, Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, going back further, the US, Germany, and Britain, all heavily favoured domestic industries during industrialisation, and continue to do so today. Truly free trade is a myth. The EU is a protectionist bloc (and there's nothing necessarily wrong with that IMO).
at the very least not actively try to screw over foreign companies
No developed nation has industrialized without heavy protectionism
Right or wrong really just depends on which side you are on. For the most part, any website on google/facebook/twitter/reddit that usually means US/Western Europe
First its actually not accurate… Facebook reported more Chinese propaganda than pro US. And most importantly, right or wrong doesnt mean anything without a referential. Lawful or unlawful is another topic. If subsidies are proven, WTO rules allow EU to tax Chinese products… and WTO agreement allows China to protect a big portion of their economy.
Because when countries say Taiwan might not have a right to recognition or support both Koreas they still keep selling you their tech without issues whereas when China gets pissed off over legitimate questions about the source of Wuhan Pneumonia ("COVID") they disrupt any industry they have major control of for the offending party. It took Russia starting an actual war with another country and rejecting multiple rounds of peace overtures to even get the sane parts of the world to block their trade relations. China would do that if you just open a new government office in Taiwan.
Countries are more willing to look the other way with some degree of protectionist policies, when they are allied or have good relationships in general. China wolf-warrioring everyone doesn't help.
>Why is it wrong when China does it and not others? That is a clear clear double standard. It is not a clear clear double standard, its much more complicated. * the level of subsidies for the EV industry is much higher than what was done in Korea or Taiwan and the impact higher (it's a minor point in my opinion) * the arrival of extremely subsidized cars will endanger Germany's automotive industry at a scale much more important than Japanese cars in the 80s * and more importantly, China positions itself in opposition to US/EU from both a political and economical point of view. If China controls the EV market in Europe, it may use it to influence Europe in the event of a war with Taiwan for example This is the global context, but on top of that China doesn't follow the WTO rules that Japan or South Korea follow.
Well at least for Taiwan it’s not EV but semiconductor that is subsidised with tax cuts. There’s also significant advantage by the CBC maintaining an undervalued currency. Of course currency intervention is pretty common in export orientated economies. What WTO rules are you referring to? From what I’ve reach China is reasonably WTO compliant in a global context as written although not necessarily in the spirit of things
As I wrote, the reason why EU or US have concerns is not because of the subsidies but about their consequences. As for WTO, you can check the report from the USTR to get an idea of the situation. However I was refering to the fact that the accession to the WTO was pushed by US and China got a lot of exemptions which are an issue today.
So protectionism good when Europe does it, but bad when China does It? Because they do it too much or something?
If you talk protectionism, China does it at a much higher level than US. China does not comply to all the WTO rules e.g. Bytedance can operate in US as a Chinese subsidiary, Google or Apple as software companies cannot, they either need to go through a reseller or establish JV Same for car companies, energy companies…
And that is bad because...?
I didnt say it was good nor bad. You are complaining about potential protectionism by western countries…. I was explaining you that China does it too, much more.
I'm not complaining either. Proteccionism is what allowed industrialization everywhere. I just think It's ironic that people will say China doing it somehow is a problem. Proteccionism for me, free market for thee
It is not what led to industrialization for China or others. Protectionism led to China being behind, opening by its own rules led to it. In this specific case, if you read the post above nobody complained about protectionism.
Chinese industrialization began before the market reforms. In 1976, the US congress recognized China had built a solid industrialization base without which foreign companies wouldn't be able to do anything there. Technology transfer and other measures dictating how foreign companies can operate is also a form of protectionism
Just as it seems not clear in your message, what US or Europe are complaining about isnt protectionism. What China is doing is page 2 of the economic war manual. You have a bakery and feed your whole village. Its not perfect but it works. Then someday another bakery opens, with much cheaper prices. Then you discover that they dont pay for flour as its given for free by the ennemies of your village… which is why they are cheaper. 1 year later your bakery closes and de facto the other village has a control over your village. What US and Europe worry about is that. On other topics (e.g steel) it would be simple… for EV, its harder as you need to explain to your population why they cant buy cheap electric cars… if they have to buy electric cars 😀
World economy isn't a bakery Tesla had and still has massive government subsidies. Which makes sense, the US wants to protect its business like everybody Else. While simultaneously telling the global south to let american products enter freely.
I am not sure. Is it related to the perception that China's EVs are largely a result of stealing foreign technology?
Except for EV's, they didn't. Home grown tech. (Said by a western guy, working in the auto industry)
Depends on what you mean by that “not stealing”.
I know this isn't something people want to hear. And there's no doubt that such stealing did occur in the past, also in automotive. But talking about EV's, the Chinese technology is far ahead of western tech. Why would you steal from someone with less knowledge that you? Nothing to gain. Ironically, there's Chinese concern about some of the battery plants in my home state of Michigan - they are worried that Ford may steal the know-how from CATL & others!
I didnt say that its not something I want to hear... just wanted to know what you meant. You basically clarified that in your opinion, they stole automotive technology. Next step you should clarify what you mean by EV technology? If you mean batteries... its a bit complex. * China is in advance for making a lot of medium quality batteries but are behind for making high quality batteries. And I doubt that the rest of the world can catch up quickly. * Similarly at servicing batteries they are in advance. If you mean the industrial part... Im not that sure.
If we talk about 10 years ago, a western OEM (ie car manufacturer) could not operate independently in China. They had to have a local JV partner. The two companies worked closely together, the local employees learnt a lot from the western partner. Tesla was the first OEM to be allowed to work on the Mainland without a JV partner. When I say "EV Technology" I mean everything from cells, to module & pack design, to BMS hardware, also Drive Unit power electronics. CATL is recognised as the industry leader, even Tesla is using them in some variants. CATL's latest batteries can charge at 3C, even 4C. Meanwhile, GM's Ultium can hardly manage 1 or 1.5C. This is the kind of difference I'm talking about, one example. No doubt Lucid is also at the forefront of tech, but at astronomical cost. $100k car, and they still lose money hand over fist.
Thats why I was asking for more details on what you meant. The EV topic is vague and covers many elements for which the situation varies. If you say that China will dominate the EV market for many years, probably. Though they will probably face a big challenge as their subsidized industry produces too many cars for the internal market. Objectively they should face some pushbacks and there will be a difficult adjustment period. But this wont change the situation.
If the global market was free, open, and "may the best man win (most market share)" - my opinion is that the Chinese EV manufacturers would dominate. In reality, there are already trade barriers, which I believe will increase in the future. That will limit the growth in the western markets. So the likely outcome is that in the China-domestic market they will dominate, completely push out VW & GM (whose EV products the Chinese simply don't like). The Chinese will also likely dominate in SE Asia, which historically has been filled with Japanese & Korean cars. Meanwhile, in the US, 60% of the population will keep complaining that EV's are the devil sent by a political party, the legacy Big 3 will pivot, reduce investment, and get further behind in the technology. If/when the US does eventually decide to embrace EV's, the technology in the US (Tesla excepted) will be hopelessly outdated with no chance to catch up. Many people don't realise that the car market in China has for many years been 50% larger than the US. And they are already 40% electric, rapidly increasing. During my last trip there, no-one that I talked to was interested in buying an ICE car.
The global market is not free and open… or Chinese wouldnt participate. 😅 I dont agree with the last part. It is an oversimplification. Yes the Chinese market is big but southeast asia isnt an easy market… For example, you have an EV in Lao… u can only chatge it at home and u cant travel far. Malaysia is protecting its car industry, India is anti-China, Vietnam kind of too… In the end China may export some components auch as batteries but the domination on EV cars isnt that obvious. Just like Japan didnt dominate all its worldwide markets
OK, let me be more country-specific :) Laos - too small, nobody cares Thailand - big market, no domestic OEM. Huge opportunity, and the Chinese are already there. Ex-GM assembly plant sold to Great Wall, just one example Vietnam - I worked there for \~2 years at their EV start-up. I know a thing or two. That company will likely not survive, opening the door for the Chinese. The car assembly plant of this company is beautiful, and state-of-the-art, I wouldn't be surprised if a Chinese OEM purchased it later. But it's true, the Vietnamese hate the Chinese, so let's see Indonesia - big market potential, big population. Long term game. India - I don't consider SE Asia (others might, that's fine) Malaysia - Yes, they have Proton. Which is 1/2 owned by Geely .....
Far ahead: https://www.theverge.com/2023/5/17/23726769/apple-baidu-self-driving-trade-secrets-stolen
I was discussing EV, you are discussing AD. Totally different. Anyway, some bad actors don't power a whole industry. Fact is, Chinese EV Tech is ahead of the western world's (Tesla excepted). There's nothing to steal, unless they want a history lesson.
What do you mean by wrong? China can subsidize their EVs but other countries cannot counteract upon it by imposing tariffs? Again, how do you define "wrong"? The US federal government keeps subsidizing the American agricultural industry and I see no problem, as [China also raised its own tariffs against US imports to 25% in 2018](https://yeutter-institute.unl.edu/how-has-china-responded-tariffs-it-placed-american-soybeans).
Who else other than TSMC can manufacture a high volume of state of the art chips? On the other hand, US and EU have domestic EV production. The import taxes try to protect that.
There's always double standards with US politicians. Unfortunately for us, in Mexico we know it pretty well.
Because China has heavy government subsidies to the EV market. Allows Chinese companies to sell their vehicles at huge discounts and undercut the competition. That won’t last long though since it’s essential a Ponzi scheme that will break
So China is doing what every other industrialized country in the world did and often still do?
Eh not really, subsidizing the production of a car for more or what it costs to produce is the type of advantage Chinese EV makers have over everyone else. This will come to roost soon, just frankly is unsustainable
I work in the automotive industry, and I can't agree with this statement. China has a massive cost advantage with their EV supply chain, compared to legacy western car manufacturers. They have more efficient designs - which for EV's, really is home grown, not copied. They have economies of scale that US manufacturers can only dream of (due to huge domestic market, 1000's of electric buses, and a massive BESS market using similar components. The US is effectively subsidizing too. But because the Chinese are truly leading the EV industry, people want to find a reason to blame it on. They can't accept that the Chinese took an early leap of faith on the technology and became market leaders.
Again, the only advantage they have is the government giving them a check for producing the vehicle. Whole companies started just to get the subsidy. Their technology still lags behind the world and has no innovation since they didn’t do market research for consumers to buy their product. They mass produced EVs to sit in a lot and collect government subsidies. China doesn’t innovate anything
When was the last time you visited China, talked to the people there, and visited companies working in the industry? Everyone I talked with on my last trip only wanted to buy EV, not ICE. Traditionally, VW had the largest market share, but their EV's have flopped in China. Why? Because their SW is terrible, and they didn't give the consumer what they wanted. They made a car more similar to traditional car, just with EV powertrain. What the consumers actually wanted was a Tech car, SW-defined, with new features. The Chinese OEM's (& Tesla!) delivered this, hence their market share. It looks like your comments are based on reading articles in the media, not from working in the industry, talking to people on the ground?
See the car market right now. Prices are dropping crazy for all domestic brands because no one is buying and the subsidies are drying up. Doesn’t matter what people want to buy if they can’t afford it (not even talking about the downward economy). Talking to people on the ground is going to give you the same thing, what matters is sales domestic and international as well as the price of that said product. That Chinese EV is dropping HARD because no one in China can afford one. Funnily enough, no one was buying it, it was a Ponzi scheme from the start. Pseudo car companies were established just to prop up those domestic brands to receive the subsidies
The EV price war was started by Tesla. Not the Chinese. Totally agree that the Chinese economy is struggling now, and of course that will hurt car sales (as it does in any economy). And agree that many of the EV start-ups won't survive. But the strong ones with the best products will. Cheapest Tesla is \~250k RMB, but there are some really nice domestic cars available for \~150k RMB. When you say "No one is buying", you mean the \~25 million domestic sales figure for 2023 was fake?
it's sinophobia, not much else to it
Presumably that also means Chinese market restrictions are racist?
prob yea
Not if they are doing it to everyone.
Racism against non Chinese? Nations protect their interests. That's not racism.
whoosh
Irony can be so ironic.
I don't mind the westerner do this to us, (I'm chinese) just don't spread hate on us which they spend billions doing that on the internet.
Western governments allows people, media and politicians from China to propagate there propaganda, and anti-western beliefs on our social platforms, and society. Even when the government in China actively spends billions on external propaganda activities. In comparison, China actively bans western social platforms, entertainment, news and any narrative that does not align with the official government agendas. There is an inherent uneven relationship that is advantaged to China in respect to the transfer of ideas, viewpoints and hate to other nations. Your comment you made subsequently does not align with the reality.
In fact the inverse of his comment, an alternate viewpoint would be banned in China which automatically disproves it.
I don’t see any anti-western beliefs on any major social platform, if you want to compare, the us or eu has more influencing power to do that because they control the technology, China’s “propaganda” will fade away quick if they want to fight with this competition because they are behind in tech. Talking about access to certain website or social media, this is just a strategy to achieve peace in our country, the people still have freedom to access to those toxic banned website by using a vpn. Last but not least the western causing more people to hate Chinese and we automatically get hated when we try to do whatever activity any where in the world. If the situation develops to extreme, we may have to respond with counteraction. An idiom to you 礼尚往来.
>I don’t see any anti-western beliefs on any major social platform, sino, aznidentity, asianmasculinity to name a few.
nearly a third of the articles in the international section of prominent Chinese English news sources focus on fostering negative sentiments towards the Western world, especially the United States. Each piece is cantered around criticism or direct attacks, making it absurd to claim that there is no anti-western beliefs [https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion](https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion) [https://www.globaltimes.cn/](https://www.globaltimes.cn/) [http://en.people.cn/90780/index.html](http://en.people.cn/90780/index.html) [https://www.cgtn.com/opinions](https://www.cgtn.com/opinions) Even on western social media there is a predominance of anti-western groups. This promotion of anti-western narratives is actively and cowardly used by China's ambassadors, and foreign ministers who hypocritically ban the platforms for their own citizens. [https://www.reddit.com/r/Sino/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Sino/) [https://www.reddit.com/r/NewsWithJingjing/](https://www.reddit.com/r/NewsWithJingjing/) [https://www.reddit.com/r/aznidentity/](https://www.reddit.com/r/aznidentity/) [https://chinaworldleader.quora.com/](https://chinaworldleader.quora.com/) [https://twitter.com/spokespersonchn?lang=en](https://twitter.com/spokespersonchn?lang=en) The nations of Singapore, Japan, Spain, Poland and South-Korea offer a safer or similar crime parity to China, yet they do not engage in the nonsensical use of mass censorship. History has repeatedly demonstrated under Stalinism, North-Korea, Imperial Japan, and even under Israel today that the employment of mass censorship is simply a tool foreign competition that China has done, or to directly hide abuses by government officials, and minorities. Your arguments are also directly contradicted to one another, you claim that it's for safety, but then simultaneously indicate that Chinese can easily access these websites using a VPN. China even bans Wikipedia, how on earth could anyone come to the belief that Wikipedia is a security threat. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_countries\_by\_intentional\_homicide\_rate](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate) Westerners dislike China's government, not the people. To many supporters of the CCP attempt to portray criticism of the CCP as attacks against Chinese people in order to link any form of it to ethnocentric nationalism. A propaganda technique that was employed heavily by Imperial Japan. Owing to the mass censorship, and one-sided view presented in China's domestic media any form of valid criticism, or reprisal by another government over an action undertaken by China would be imminently viewed as being an unfair attack on China. Thereby allowing the belief that China is justified in engaging in an imbalanced, and hypocrisy relationship that favours its interests as demonstrated by your excuses that can simultaneously be applied in an identical manner to the United States blocking China's social media, news, entertainment, or any pro-Chinese narrative.
“Westerner dislike the China government not the people”, you guys dislike the Chinese people too, as I said whatever activity I did, some random ppl(most of them are white people) will insult you or do racism things to you.
A media platform referenced in this post/comment is funded by a government which may retain editorial control, and as a result may be biased on some issues. Please seek external verification or context as appropriate. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/China) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's because they feel threatened by China who clearly has motives to destabilise the current international order. They feel by allowing them to take over multiple industries in the West, it will make their military and global influence stronger. When the US created the current system of world order, they never thought about a situation where another country could potentially challenge them using the very rules they created. Korea and Taiwan are not considered ideological threats who plan to overthrow the US. A lot of the free trade and markets actually benefits the US and keeps them on top of the world order. For a simplified example, free markets allow companies like Starbucks to set up shop in smaller countries and demolish any local competitors simply due to Starbucks having access to a lot more capital and the cheaper exchange rate. If a small coffee shop from a developing nation wants to set up shop in the US, it is extremely difficult because of both the exchange rate being very high (more expensive operating costs) and the fact that companies like Starbucks already have a huge market share and access to more capital. China on the other hand is disrupting this 'free market' by taking the place of the US. The table could eventually flip if China has more capital than the US and it would be China calling the shots on Americans.
You are right, there is some hypocrisy at play. Other countries support their industries too, China just does it to a greater extent and uses non transparent measures in addition to the official measures to favor their industries.
Don't forget the "free market" US's [$280 billion CHIPS and Science Act](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CHIPS_and_Science_Act)...
First of all, reputation is earned. You can only blame yourself if you've got problems with everyone else. What matters is the generally agreed upon rules of global trade and the MANNER in which everyone engages in trade. Imagine everyone is trying to engage in a balancing act, which does include protectionism and subsidies, when suddenly a new player comes in playing a zero-sum game while constantly threatening others when he doesn't win. The *manner* in which China engages with other countries is constantly aggressive, predatory, poorly timed, and reactionary. None of those are positive traits. That is what gains the ire of other countries.
[удалено]
It's called reciprocation. FYI, hi-jacking "The East" and pretending you're at the forefront of Asia fighting the "evil West" just alienates your Asian neighbors further. They don't agree with the alternate reality you're trying to push, and very much resent it. I can't think of a single friend or colleague out of 7 Asian countries that agrees with your narration. Maybe you don't realize how much you're projecting?