So much change has taken place in China in the past three decades--and is taking place at such a dazzling pace on a daily basis--that it is a daunting task for the knowledgeable, not to mention the newly curious, to grasp the picture that is China today. Using the same techniques behind his Megatrends published in 1982, Naisbitt has written a welcome book that describes today's China in broad strokes, or the "eight pillars", in his terms.
In short, a good effort from a Westerner to try to present China using a balanced approach; an informed read definitely for the newly curious.
But the book is clearly strained in certain places--hence only a four-star rating--as a result of the author's failure to truly grasp the essence of thousands-year-old Chinese culture, which surely is a fundamental force forever existent to shape China's future.
Consider this fatal misconception on pages 41-42 where the author discusses his interesting observation about China's "vertical democracy":
"Social order and harmony were central to the teachings of Confucius, who believed that only order could provide true freedom. This concept also prevails in team sports, where rules set the conditions for freedom in playing. In the same way, an orderly society establishes the context within which people can act freely. In the Chinese way of thinking, order does not oppress people but defines room to maneuver."
Ask anybody who has studied Confucius and Chinese history, he or she will tell us that at the heart of the teachings of Confucius are family ethics extended to the whole of a society--making China a "connections-based society", according to Wei Wang, author of The China Executive. In other words, it is "interpersonal relations, involving both obedience and accountability" that constitute the unique fabric of Chinese society.
And if we reflect a little upon our own society, we know that contrary to what Naisbitt says above, the concept of "team", where rules set the conditions for freedom in playing, actually lies at the very heart of a Western society, making it "rules-based".
Therefore, if the watchword for Chinese society is harmony, then the watchword for a Western society is freedom. And neither is perfect.
For me, this most fundamental difference between a Western society and Chinese society, which is thoroughly and entertainingly discussed in The China Executive (in particular, on pages 20-34; and while The China Executive is a business book, it contains many important insights into the strengths and weaknesses of Chinese culture and worldview--especially in chapters 1 and 9), has profound implications for where China is heading.
For instance, instead of saying that China is developing a vertical democracy as Naisbitt does, we could argue that China's path to democracy has to begin from the middle, i.e. at the level of an enterprise. Chinese history tells us that dramatic change at either the top or the bottom would lead to chaos or even civil wars simply because the vast majority of the Chinese people have not had sufficient training in system-wide logical thinking.
An enterprise is an appropriate "team" context, in which the Chinese can try to break away from their age-old family-oriented thinking and learn to debate in a logical way, to put forward appropriate rules, and to experience the consequences of following or not following the rules.
Put it simply, if the Chinese struggle to behave according to rules in an enterprise--we have to remember that over half of the 1.3 billion people have never had the chance to be a member of any rules-based organisation--it is hopeless to expect them to be able to understand and observe the rules of a nationwide democracy.
Read Tim Clissold's book Mr China, we will understand why even at the enterprise level, the idea of a "team" still poses such a challenge to the Chinese.
"China cannot be thoroughly understood from either a Western or a Chinese perspective. To grasp its nature requires an orbital, historical view of both the West and China," Wang says. It is also safe to say that China has risen in the past three decades as a result of its learning from the West, and there is no doubt that it will continue to learn from the West.
But by largely justifying the status quo of China, Naisbitt seems to suggest that there is no need for China to learn further from the West. (Arguably, there is even more for the West to learn from China or rather Chinese civilisation, but that is a different matter - a good place to start with is Yu Dan's Confucius from the Heart.)
Nowhere is this more clearly shown than at the beginning and the end of the book, where the author posed the question: "How did China succeed?" (Note the past tense of the sentence.)
Surely this is against Confucian spirit, which would tell us that China's road to success (if we define success as both harmony and freedom) is still "long and arduous" ("renzhong er daoyuan", The Analects, book VIII, chapter 7) - some of the challenges China will have to face are discussed by James Kynge in China Shakes the World.