In a global survey published by Amnesty International (大赦国际) on May 19, Chinese, German and British people are most welcoming to refugees among the 27 countries surveyed. Russia ranked as ‘least welcoming’ in the so-called ‘refugees welcome index’ (see image, by Amnesty International).
News of Amnesty’s survey was posted on Sina Weibo by different Chinese media, attracting thousands of comments over the past two days. The news item about Amnesty’s report shared by SDO News received over 6000 comments and was shared nearly 13.500 times within one day.
Many comments show that Chinese netizens do not identify with the results of Amnesty’s report. An online survey by a prominent Chinese news media outlet also measured a completely different public acceptance of refugees in the PRC.
“94% Chinese would welcome refugees in their country, 46% welcoming to refugees in their household.”
Amnesty International’s survey measured people’s acceptance towards refugees in 27 different countries. For each country, approximately 1,000 people were surveyed. The Chinese surveyed came from 18 different cities, all of which were province capitals or province-level municipalities. The survey was done through phone.
In the report, Chinese people were top-ranking for ‘welcoming refugees’ in the three main questions. The survey reveals that 70% of Chinese surveyees agree that people should be able to take refuge in other countries to escape war or persecution in their own country. Additionally, 86% think that the Chinese government should do more to help refugees fleeing war or persecution. It also says that 94% of the people are willing to accept refugees in their country and 46% of surveyees are even willing to welcome refugees in their own household.
China’s refugee welcome index is calculated as 85/100 according to Amnesty International, topping 27 surveyed countries with 32 points above average. Germany (84) and UK (83) closely follows.
“I would like to know which ‘Chinese’ are surveyed.”
But online, a great majority of Weibo users distrust the survey results. Chinese news media outlet Huanqiu (Global Times, 环球网) also conducted an online survey on the same day as Amnesty’s survey was published, with only two questions: ‘would you accept refugees in your own household?’ and ‘would you accept refugees in your neighborhood or city?’. The results turned out to be quite the opposite from Amnesty International’s findings: 90.3% said no to the first question and 79.6% said no to the second.
Doubting the representativeness of Amnesty International’s report, many netizens say: “This organization does not represent me”, “Where does this data come from?!” and: “I would like to know which ‘Chinese’ are surveyed.”
“If this was about any other country, I would believe it – but not about China,” one popular comment says.
“How can a country be welcoming to others when it already has difficulty to take care of its own citizens?”
Many Weibo commenters point out that unwillingness to accept refugees is related to China’s demographic and economic situation. One netizen comments that China already has many domestic refugees, as many Chinese struggle to make a living in their own native places: “How can a country be welcoming to others when it already has difficulty to take care of its own citizens?”, and: “Leave us alone, we’re refugees ourselves.”
People refer to China’s population of nearly 1.4 billion, which is also a heavy burden to the country. “I am not cold hearted, but charity should be measured by ability”, one person remarks on Sina Weibo. And: “China is still a developing country itself, dealing with a rapidly increasing population – we’re just not capable of taking in refugees.”
There is also anger in the comments of Weibo users, as many of them doubt the motives of Amnesty International and claim that the survey was purposely presented this way to make China look bad for not taking in more refugees. They plead that instead of going to China, America should take in more refugees: “Let them go there [America]!”
Many responding to the Huanqiu survey believe that responsibility for the refugee crisis lies with those countries, especially the United States, that have meddled in the conflicts in the Middle Eastern countries refugees are now fleeing from.
There is also not much positive feedback for Amnesty International, with many calling the human rights organization “foolish” and “delusional”.
“China’s contribution to the global refugee intake is only marginal.”
In the current refugee crisis, it is Europe that is mostly facing pressure on its asylum system – not China. Both the results of the Amnesty International and Global Times survey, representative or not, are therefore only speculative on how public attitudes would be if incoming refugees would become a real issue for the PRC. Hosting refugees is currently not a prominent issue on China’s current state agenda.
According to UN Refugee Agency UNHCR, China had taken in about 300,000 refugees by June 2015 – a figure that is relatively small compared to the country’s native population.
China’s contribution to the global refugee intake is marginal in comparison to global statistics, says China International Migration Report 2015 published by Centre for China and Globalization. Most refugees come from adjacent countries in conflict such as Vietnam and Burma. In the past decades in general, China has witnessed more emigration than immigration, and foreign residence in China is more temporal than permanent.
“Europe’s “road to ruin”
Europe’s refugee crisis has become a recurring topic on Sina Weibo over the last year. The overall views on the situation are diverse, with some expressing that Europe should take in all immigrants while others foresee big problems. Some say that Europe is on the “road to ruin”, as the immigrant wave is “catastrophic to Europe’s economic and political climate”. This is one reason why some netizens say that “Europe is on the road to ruin. But as long as you don’t come to China, it’s fine by me.”
The debate on taking in refugees is also often connected to the subject of religion and Islamic terrorism, with people referring to the attacks in Paris and saying that they are unwilling to let “Islam enter China”.
One thing that is conclusive about the survey and the controversy it has attracted, is that Amnesty International’s report paints a much more optimistic picture of China’s refugee hospitality than the one that is painted by the majority of China’s Weibo commenters, who are, for now, far less enthusiastic about welcoming immigrants to their cities than their number one place on the ‘welcome refugee index’ suggests.
[23.5.2016 update to this article in the video below]
Image by Chinatimes.com
©2016 Whatsonweibo. All rights reserved. Do not reproduce our content without permission – you can contact us at email@example.com.
Looking at Your Phone While Crossing the Road Will Now Cost You Money in Zhejiang
Pedestrians looking at their phones while crossing the road are getting a red light in Zhejiang.
Zhejiang Province in eastern China has recently launched a new policy: pedestrians crossing the road while looking at their phone risk getting a 50 RMB ($7) fine.
The policy has been attracting the attention of netizens on Chinese social media, where the so-called “Bowed head clan” (dītóuzú 低头族) – a slang word for smartphone-addicted people – has been a recurring hot topic.
People paying more attention to their phone than watching traffic while crossing the road can lead to very dangerous situations. Some graphic videos making their rounds on Weibo today show security camera footage of people getting run over by cars while looking at their phone.
The majority of people responding to the hashtag “Should people be fined for looking down to their phone while crossing the road?” (#低头玩手机过马路该罚款吗#) agree that this kind of behaviour is a risk to traffic safety, but some wonder if a small fine would be effective in combating this problem.
Some cities in China have introduced sidewalks with a “phone lane” and “no phone lane” over previous years, with Chongqing being the first city to do so in 2014.
As of earlier this year, the Pedestrian Council of Australia is also looking to implement a law that makes it possible to fine pedestrians who cross the road while looking at their phones.
In Honolulu, the ‘distracted walking law’ already makes it illegal for people to be distracted by their cellphones while walking in a crosswalk.
“Fine them!”, some commenters on Weibo say: “And also fine those people using their phone while driving their electric bicycles!”
“I’m not sure about the fine,” another person says: “I only know I bumped into a tree today walking looking at my phone..”
For many commenters, however, the issue is a no-brainer: “Just don’t use your phone while crossing the road. Personal safety comes first.”
Spotted a mistake or want to add something? Please let us know in comments below or email us.
©2019 Whatsonweibo. All rights reserved. Do not reproduce our content without permission – you can contact us at firstname.lastname@example.org
‘American Factory’ Sparks Debate on Weibo: Pro-China Views and Critical Perspectives
‘American Factory’ stirs online discussions in China.
Even as China posts its lowest industrial output growth since 2002, Weibo’s ongoing reaction to Netflix documentary American Factory is rife with declarations of the Chinese manufacturing sector’s impending victory over its US rival. This, however, is not the full story.
The first documentary distributed by Higher Ground Productions, owned by former US President and First Lady, Barack and Michelle Obama, American Factory painted a damning picture of Trump’s protectionist policies.
US manufacturing cannot keep up with the brute efficiency of its Chinese competitors. The story of a shuttering American factory revived by Chinese investment and an influx of Chinese workers, opening up a Pandora’s Box of cultural clashes, paints a telling, but pessimistic, picture of the current strategic conflict between the two superpowers, from the ground-up.
Despite the Great Firewall, Chinese netizens found ways to watch the documentary, that was made by Ohio filmmakers Steve Bognar and Julia Reichert. Temporary links to streaming and subtitle services litter the Chinese Internet, making any accurate count of total mainland viewership nigh-impossible. However, one indication of the film’s popularity among mainlanders was the 259,000 views for a trailer posted on Bilibili.
One likely reason for netizens’ interest is that it neatly plays into Chinese state media rhetoric on the US-China trade war.
The inevitability of China’s rise up the global supply chain (and a corresponding decline on the US side) is a recurring theme in opinion pieces penned by the likes of Xinhua and Global Times, but also an increasingly louder cacophony of bloggers.
“American Factory shows that the US will probably lose out to China in manufacturing.”
One Chinese company (Wind资讯) posted on Weibo that “what Obama means in this film, in a very oblique way, is that anti-globalization will produce a lose-lose scenario.”
The official Weibo account of Zhisland, a Chinese networking platform for entrepreneurs around the world (@正和岛标准) posted a review of the Netflix film titled: “Behind the Popularity of American Factory: Time Might Not Be on America’s Side” (“《美国工厂》走红背后：时间，或许真的不在美国那边了“).
It warns the audience right off the bat to “not assume that this film will promote cooperation between China and the United States. In contrast, it will surely stir up mixed feelings among both audiences.”
“American Factory shows that the US will probably lose out to China in manufacturing,” Zhisland writes. The article argues that China will win out due to its lower labor costs, lack of trade unions, and more disciplined managerial styles. “It’s an uneven playing field,” the author continues: “Time may not be on America’s side.”
Toward the end, the author claims: “We are about to enter a new era in which China will gradually become the most dominant player in the global marketplace.”
The fact that many on Weibo shared these kinds of pieces as a reaction to the documentary suggests there is confirmation bias at work here. As is common on Weibo and other social media, comments on the pieces like the above simply rattle unsubstantiated claims, frequently descending into ad hominems.
Another Weibo user (@用户Mr.立早) adds comments when sharing the above article: “The American workers repeat Trump’s mantra, but won’t act on it. They’ve been idling for almost a century. They’re hopeless.”
“American Factory tells you: separate the US economy from China, and the US will go bankrupt.”
Chinese state media also chimed in on how American Factory proved their most important talking points on the ongoing US-China trade conflict.
Xinmin Evening News, an official newspaper run by the Communist Party’s Shanghai Committee, published an article by Wu Jian called “American Factory Tells You: Separate the US Economy from China, and the US Will Go Bankrupt” (“《美国工厂》告诉你：将美国经济从中国分离，美国会破产“).
In this piece, Jian claims that “in the age of globalization, ties between China and the US cannot be cut. Using high tariffs to force U. S. manufacturing return to the States… is simply not realistic. Separate the US economy from China, and the U.S. will go bankrupt.”
The article was also shared widely on Weibo. Thepaper.cn, an online news site affiliated with Shanghai United Media Group, published a review titled “American Factory: The Things that Are Spelled Out and the Things that are Implied” (“《美国工厂》：那些说出来的，和没有说的“).
The author, Xu Le, writes: “What struck me most about the film was the look on the faces of the American workers. All of them … had the same burnt-out expression… Their faces reminded me of photos of people in the late Qing Dynasty. That dull expression reflects a civilization in decline.”
In the film, When American foremen visit a factory run by glass manufacturer Fuyao in China, they are alarmed to see Chinese workers picking up glass shards without safety glasses or cut-resistant gloves.
Xu comments: “Why is it that Chinese workers are able to put up with even more drudgery while being paid far less than their American counterparts? This is something we Chinese are very familiar with.”
“Are you the glory, or are you the cost of the glory?”
Qin Hui, professor of history at Tsinghua University, once argued that China’s economic growth isn’t because of economic liberalism or government oversight, but because of China’s refusal to guarantee certain basic human rights.
In Maoist China, the state stripped the underprivileged of all political power in the name of the greater good dictated by socialist dogma. Post-Mao China continues to exploit the underprivileged, but now for monetary gain. He called it China’s “advantage” of “low human rights.”
Despite the nationalism sentiment fanned by American Factory, it has also provoked reflection on China’s advantage of low human rights summarized by Qin Hui.
Weibo user ‘Zhi21’ (@ZHI2i), a recent college graduate, writes on Weibo: “I just finished an internship at a factory. I worked 12 hours a day. More than 11 hours of every shift was spent on my feet without stopping, just to keep up with the assembly line. It didn’t make sense to me. After watching American Factory, I feel like American workers are lucky to only work 8 hours a day. That’s why the production costs are higher in the States. They pay too much attention to whether or not workers are comfortable.”
Another Weibo blogger (@GhostSaDNesS) notes that “in American Factory, Fuyao employees believe that to work is to live. They defend the interests of capitalists while they are actively exploited. Unions in the West chose human rights, Chinese capitalists chose profit, and Chinese workers have no choice at all.”
Some of these posts were apparently censored; threads that displayed as having over 200 comments only showed 12, and users complained that their posts were being deleted or made invisible to other users by Weibo censors. “They didn’t give any explanation,” one blogger wrote: ” I only expressed that I felt sorry for the people at the bottom. I didn’t question the system. I didn’t ask to change society.”
Views like that of @Crimmy_Excelsior (“I was confused. Which country is the capitalist one and which country is the socialist one?“) are apparently sensitive enough to be taken offline – they touch upon the tension between the CCP’s espousal of Marxist-Leninism and the plight faced by hundreds of millions of Chinese that have their working conditions driven down by capitalist markets.
Many users don’t buy into nationalist interpretations of the film, and argue that economic gain achieved at the expense of human rights is shameful. @陈生大王 raises a poignant question: “This is a glorious time for China, but I hope this film inspires you to think about who you really are as an individual. Are you the glory, or are you the cost of the glory?”
“The cost of the glory” is derived from a quip popular on China’s internet. The Chinese government often urges its citizens to rally together, using the rhetoric, “We must win this trade war at all cost.” Some netizens then twisted the phrase, saying, “We must win this trade war at all cost, and we later find out that we are the cost.”
“China’s prosperity did not just happen overnight – Chinese people worked hard to make it happen.”
Even among those in favor of China’s controversial work ethics, there have been concerns over the status quo. Earlier this year, engineers in the tech industry publicly aired their grievances about their “996” lifestyle. The term refers to a high-pressure work schedule of 9am to 9pm, six days a week. This is the kind of life workers in Fuyao are living, with no hope of improvement – they are that the company would find a replacement in no time, making any form of complaining moot.
Recent events in mainland China only increase the credibility of this representation. Factory workers at Jasic, a maker of welding machinery in Shenzhen, attempted to start a union last year. All those involved were fired. A number of college students and activists who actively supported the workers were detained and persecuted.
According to the “China Labor Movement Report (2015-2017)” by China Labor Bulletin (a NGO based in Hong Kong that promotes and defends workers’ rights in the People’s Republic of China) “intensification of social conflicts, including labor-capital conflicts, has crossed a tipping point, and directly threatens the legitimacy of the regime.”
More conspicuously, there are netizens that don’t buy the narrative that Chinese workers are innately “tougher” than their American counterparts. As user @胡尕峰 observes: “(In the film), a new Chinese CEO explains to his fellow Chinese that Americans have been encouraged too much growing up, and can’t take criticism. Chinese born after 2000 have been raised the same way! In my circle of friends, some mothers nearly faint when their babies are finally able to poop. Is China going to end up the same as America?”
American Factory’s objective portrayal of cultural shocks between American and Chinese workforces clearly generated thoughtful reflections and incisive criticism from a sizeable number of netizens, while also being another reason for Chinese state media to highlight the rise of China in the global market.
The chairman of Fuyao Group, Cao Dewang, made headlines this week with the quote: “China’s prosperity did not just happen overnight – Chinese people worked hard to make it happen.” “We indeed worked hard for it,” some commenters agreed: “That’s definitely true.”
Edited by Eduardo Baptista
Spotted a mistake or want to add something? Please let us know in comments below or email us. Please note that your comment below will need to be manually approved if you’re a first-time poster here.
©2019 Whatsonweibo. All rights reserved. Do not reproduce our content without permission – you can contact us at email@example.com
Express VPN Deal This Black Friday / Cyber Monday (China 2019)
40-Year-Old Woman Completes Shanghai Marathon While 8 Months Pregnant
No Need for Plague Panic? China’s Trending Plague Outbreak
Chinese Anti-Bullying Movie “Better Days” Becomes Hit at Box Office and on Social Media
Didi Announces Relaunch of Hitch Carpooling, Igniting Controversy with Curfew for Women
- Backgrounder3 months ago
These Are the Foreign Brands Apologizing to China amid Hong Kong Tensions
- China Digital2 months ago
Cybersecurity Experts Warn: Flicking the V-Sign in Photos Could Give Away Your Fingerprint Data
- China Media3 months ago
CCTV Launches Dramatic Propaganda Video Condemning Hong Kong Protests, Praising HK Police Force
- China Local News2 months ago
Online Anger over Inappropriate Toast by Dutch Watch Brand Executive at Chinese Dinner Party