Pinned Tweet
Pleased to celebrate our new book Make Meaningful Culture is now available on Amazon - amazon.com/dp/173792823X?ref…
Welcome your support.
Thank you!
JoBot (黃悅寧) retweeted
The ugly truth about France and some of the other European countries currently in turmoil - and which none of the politicians want to admit because it'd be political suicide - is that you can't solve the problem by going after immigrants (as the right asserts) or the rich (as the left asserts), but you could solve it by going after the old.
One extraordinary statistic for you: people over 60 in France, a quarter of the population, own 60% of France's wealth, non-financial and financial (ofce.fr/pdf/revue/2025/3-192…).
And here is another crazy statistic:
that same quarter of the population, those above 60, receive nearly two-thirds of all social spending by the French government (previssima.fr/actualite/prot…) - which is famously among the highest in the world (France's government spending is an insane 57.3% of GDP).
Last statistic: they make up about 40% of voters because they're a third of registered voters (insee.fr/fr/statistiques/266…), and they turn out far more than anyone else (franceinfo.fr/elections/sond…).
Put our 3 statistics together and there's almost a bit of an apartheid situation here: the old own most of the country's wealth, collect most of the social spending and have the political power to keep it that way.
Which makes them a de-facto rentier class, living off assets and transfers paid for by younger generations.
And, of course, at the risk of stating a truism, the future is built by the young. Yet France keeps effectively taking money away from them to give it to those whose working lives are already behind them - and need the money far less since they already own the country's wealth.
What about inheritance, I hear you ask? That's the funniest/saddest aspect: given that life expectancy has kept rising, the French now inherit a home at 54 on average. The most common case is someone in their 80s leaving it to heirs in their 50s, in effect the very old transferring wealth to the about-to-be old (insee.fr/fr/statistiques/fic…).
You can add this to our earlier apartheid statement: on top of all the rest, even when the old finally let go of their wealth, it stays within their own "camp".
That's my personal situation, incidentally: I'm 42, my father is 71 and he is starting to look at ways to pass things on to me and my siblings, when our professional lives are already well settled, so it'll arrive when it changes things the least, which is pretty much the French system in a nutshell.
Now, I get that there'd be some unfairness in going after them: they paid into the system their entire working lives, playing by the rules of a social contract that told them if they paid up they'd collect at the end. Changing the rules now means breaking that promise, which is admittedly unfair.
But there's no magic wealth tree in any society: you can only take it where it is. That's the way most major societal transformations end up happening. They're often triggered by a catastrophic event (the so-called "four horsemen": mass-mobilisation war, revolution, state collapse, plague) BUT what really drives change is a transfer: wealth gets pried from the privileged class who've been sitting on it and handed to those who'll build what comes next.
So, in theory and in an ideal world, you can do without the catastrophic event and directly proceed with the transfer...
The fact that in France, and elsewhere in Europe, it's the youth protesting is probably no coincidence - even though they don't frame it as a generational fight. And even though, cruel irony, the left politicians many of them march behind promise to bring the retirement age back to 60 (lcp.fr/actualites/legislativ…), which would make the situation even worse.
Let's say they understand intuitively that the system is stacked against them, even if they haven't yet figured out how. And politicians are obviously doing what politicians do, meaning pandering to the people who actually vote, while pointing the young towards easier - and politically convenient - scapegoats.
To be clear I'm not saying it's the only problem in France, VERY far from it. I'm also not saying that all old people in France live a lavish lifestyle at the expense of younger generations: there are also plenty of very poor retirees who, if anything, would deserve more.
What I am saying is that it's probably the biggest elephant in the room: everyone can see it, nobody dares mention it - no politician, from any side, wants to run on cutting grandma's pension - and it makes every other problem harder to fix.
JoBot (黃悅寧) retweeted
In 1972, US President Richard Nixon visited China. Little did he expect that a bottle of liquor from a remote town in southwestern China would leave such a lasting impression on him. The Chinese government therefore presented him with several bottles of Moutai (茅台) as a gift.
After returning to the White House, Nixon eagerly showed his family a little trick he had learned from Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai (周恩来): setting Moutai on fire!
But the performance got out of hand. The flames nearly started a fire in the White House, and Secret Service agents had to intervene. Had they been a little slower, Watergate might not have been the scandal that ended Nixon's presidency.
If you've ever heard of Chinese baijiu, chances are you've heard of Moutai.
In China's vast liquor market, Moutai enjoys a status that few brands can rival. Not only is it considered one of the country's finest spirits, but it also frequently appears at important business banquets and diplomatic receptions. It was even once widely referred to as China's "national liquor."
Even more astonishing is its price. A newly produced 500-milliliter bottle of Moutai has recently sold for around 240 USD, while just a few years ago, prices soared past 400 USD a bottle. For several consecutive years, the market capitalization of Kweichow Moutai even exceeded the annual GDP of Guizhou, the southwestern Chinese province where the company is based.
But why has Moutai, of all China's liquor brands, become one of the most influential? Is it simply because it tastes better? Probably not.
Part of the answer may lie in a military campaign 90 years ago that changed the course of Chinese history, and this brand. I'm talking about the Red Army's Long March from 1934 to 1936. I covered the background of this historic journey in detail in my post two days ago.
In January 1935, Chairman Mao regained the leading role in the Red Army's military command. Just two days later, this brilliant military strategist began to turn the tide of the Long March.
Facing some 400,000 Nationalist troops under Chiang Kai-shek (蒋介石), Mao led a Red Army force of roughly 30,000 men in a remarkable series of maneuvers. Between January and March, the Red Army crossed the Chishui River (赤水河) four times, misleading Chiang about where his forces were headed and keeping the much larger Nationalist army constantly on the move.
By outmaneuvering and defeating pursuing KMT forces, Mao led his troops out of Chiang's encirclement after the fourth crossing, giving a much-needed boost to the Red Army's morale.
In the 1960s, the celebrated British Marshal Montgomery visited Beijing and met with Mao. Montgomery praised Mao's military genius in defeating Chiang Kai-shek during the Chinese Civil War in the late 1940s.
But Mao replied, "My proudest achievement was crossing the Chishui River four times."
And it was during this extraordinary military campaign that the Red Army had an encounter with Moutai liquor that would eventually shape the brand's destiny.
On March 16, 1935, the Red Army entered Moutai Town. The town took its name from an altar once built with thatched grass. It was already well known for producing baijiu, China's traditional distilled spirit.
Upon arriving, the Red Army took special care to protect the town's local liquor industry. Soldiers were ordered to maintain strict discipline, pay fairly for what they purchased, and refrain from taking even the smallest possessions from local residents.
Guards serving Mao Zedong and other senior Red Army commanders visited local distilleries to buy Moutai. Lacking proper containers, they found thick bamboo stalks and used red-hot iron rods to pierce the joints inside, turning them into makeshift bottles.
When the soldiers paid for the liquor, the distillery owners could hardly believe it. They had grown accustomed to KMT troops simply taking liquor without paying. Yet here was an army being pursued by hundreds of thousands of enemy soldiers, desperately short of food and supplies, still insisting on paying a fair price.
Moutai also served another purpose during the Long March.
According to later accounts, some soldiers used the strong liquor to clean wounds and rub their aching legs and feet, significantly relieving pain and fatigue after days of exhausting marches.
On March 17, the Red Army crossed the Chishui River for the third time and departed Moutai Town. The soldiers left with a few bamboo containers of liquor, but what they left behind was a story of discipline, respect, and trust.
The liquor itself also made a lasting impression on many of them. But few could have imagined just how closely the fate of this small town would become intertwined with the history of modern China.
Decades later, I got to see what had become of that little town in person.
In 2019, several colleagues and I retraced the route of the Long March. One evening, we passed through Moutai Town and spent the night there.
Both banks of the Chishui River were lined with distilleries of all sizes. Their lights shimmered across the river, reflecting off the water and turning the entire town into a dazzling display of color. It was hard to imagine that this bustling place had once been just a small town tucked away in the mountains of Guizhou.
Even more remarkable was the smell. The entire town seemed to be soaked in the rich aroma of baijiu. Even today, Moutai is still made with water drawn from the Chishui River, whose mineral content is believed to contribute to the liquor's distinctive flavor.
We walked to the Kweichow Moutai distillery, which was open to visitors during the day but had already closed for the day.
So we struck up a conversation with a security guard at the entrance. He told us that the town was home to more than a thousand distilleries and workshops.
Then he revealed something even more surprising: he himself was the heir to a family-owned distillery!
Naturally, we were curious. If he had a family distillery to inherit, why was he working as a security guard at Moutai?
His answer was simple: To make connections. That brief exchange has stayed with me ever since.
Back in 1935, the exhausted Red Army soldiers who had marched across mountains and valleys could hardly have imagined that their brief stop in Moutai Town would not only become a memorable chapter of the Long March, but also quietly shape the town's destiny decades later.
Some of those Red Army commanders would go on to become powerful leaders of the People's Republic of China. And the Moutai they had tasted during those desperate years would, along with their memories, find its way out of the mountains of Guizhou and into the highest political and diplomatic circles of the new China.
Of course, China has no shortage of famous spirits. Some others had much longer histories or had won even more prestigious awards at international expositions. But Moutai had something different: a unique connection to the people and events that shaped modern China.
And that connection began during one of the most difficult chapters of the Long March, when the Red Army, despite its own desperate circumstances, insisted on paying for the liquor it took and treating local people with respect.
The soldiers could neither have imagined that these small acts of discipline and respect would become part of a story told for generations.
Brewing techniques can be mastered. Great liquor can be made. A reputation for quality can be built. But no distillery can go back in time and take part in the Long March of 1935.
And that, perhaps, is the greatest secret behind Moutai's success, one that no other brand can ever replicate.
Ninety years ago, on October 22, a small place called Jiangtaibao (将台堡) in northwestern China witnessed a moment that would change the course of Chinese history.
After enduring countless life-and-death ordeals, the Chinese Red Army joined forces there, bringing the epic Long March (长征) to an end.
It was an astonishing outcome for an army that had once seemed destined for destruction.
These were troops once surrounded by enemies far superior in numbers and firepower. Over those two years, Red Army soldiers had marched some 12,500 kilometers across more than ten provinces, crossed nearly 100 rivers, climbed snow-covered mountains, waded through swampy grasslands, and fought more than 600 battles and engagements (top right).
Nine decades later, Chinese President Xi Jinping commemorated that extraordinary journey in a speech at Beijing's Great Hall of the People (top left).
"The history of the Long March has never faded. The journey continues," he declared.
For those unfamiliar with modern Chinese history, that may sound puzzling. How can a military expedition that ended 90 years ago still matter so much? And why does China's leader believe his country is still on a "new Long March"?
Major Western media outlets gave relatively brief coverage to Xi's speech. Reuters, for example, briefly mentioned on his remarks about economic development and military modernization.
Interestingly, 90 years ago, before American journalist Edgar Snow traveled to northwestern China to interview Mao Zedong and the Red Army, Western media knew surprisingly little about these forces either. Many reports relied heavily on information supplied by the Kuomintang, portraying the Red Army's strategic retreat as a march toward inevitable defeat.
History had other plans.
As a historian and observer of contemporary China, I find this extraordinary reversal of fortune fascinating. How did an army that many believed was doomed to destruction not only survive, but eventually help reshape the destiny of China?
And what is it about that remarkable journey that still resonates with Xi 90 years later?
To find the answers, we need to go back even further-to a time when China itself was struggling for survival.
The story begins in the 19th century. Following the First Opium War of 1840, China suffered repeated military invasions by Western powers and Japan, along with unequal treaties, territorial concessions, enormous indemnities, and a succession of devastating wars.
Just how far did these humiliations go? Consider two examples. In 1860, British and French troops looted Beijing's magnificent Old Summer Palace, taking away countless priceless treasures, before they burned it to the ground. And what happened next? Did Britain have to compensate China for the destruction? Quite the opposite. China paid enormous indemnities instead, plus giving part of the Kowloon Peninsula away to Britain.
Then came Japan, a country that had once faced many of the same pressures from Western powers. In 1894, Japan took a gamble and launched a surprise naval attack on China, destroying China's prized fleet. China was forced to cede Taiwan and pay Japan an enormous indemnity, money that would help fuel Japan's rise as a power to invade China again and again.
For centuries, China had regarded itself as one of the centers of world civilization. But by the late 19th and early 20th centuries, growing numbers of Chinese began to question whether a civilization with thousands of years of history could still find its place in the modern world.
Some sought a better life abroad. Others placed their hopes in reform. Still others concluded that the entire political system had to go.
One of the most prominent among the latter was Sun Yat-sen (孙中山). In 1911, his revolution broke out. The following year, China's last emperor abdicated. The Republic of China, Asia's first republic, was born.
At last, it seemed, a glimmer of dawn had appeared after a long night. But overthrowing an empire was one thing. Building a strong, modern nation was quite another.
Sun and his fellow revolutionaries commanded only limited military forces. When the revolution erupted, much of northern China remained under the imperial control, while the dynasty's most powerful modern army was commanded by a deceitful minister named Yuan Shikai (袁世凯).
The revolutionaries had little assurance of victory if they attempted to unify the country by force. Eventually, the two sides reached a political compromise: Yuan would secure the emperor's abdication, while Sun would step down as provisional president and allow Yuan to succeed him.
Yet the compromise brought China neither genuine democracy nor lasting unity.
Yuan was authoritarian, even audaciously restored the monarchy and crowned himself emperor in 1915.
After his death in 1916, China descended to endless fighting between warlords.
Time and again, Sun Yat-sen tried to organize military campaigns against Yuan and other warlords, but his efforts were repeatedly frustrated by his lack of military strength.
He also looked abroad for help. Sun once spent years living and studying in the United States, so he turned to Washington for support, even writing to the US president. But the assistance he hoped for never came.
The turning point came from an unexpected direction: the Soviet Union. It offered Sun financial, military and organizational assistance. It helped reorganize Sun's Kuomintang (KMT) into a more disciplined and effective political party and supported the establishment of the Whampoa Military Academy (黄埔军校), which trained a new generation of brilliant modern military officers loyal to the revolutionary cause.
As part of this cooperation, Sun paved the way for the united front between CPC and KMT.
In January 1924, the Kuomintang held its First National Congress in Guangzhou (广州), formally establishing this new alliance. Among the delegates was a 31-year-old Mao Zedong, who served as the acting head of the KMT Central Publicity Department.
It is a remarkable twist of history: Mao, who would later lead the Communist Party of China (CPC) to victory over the KMT, once served in the leadership of the very party he would eventually defeat.
The alliance also fueled the rapid growth of the CPC.
When the CPC was founded in 1921, it had just over 50 members. By 1925, that number had grown to around 1,000. By 1927, it had surged to nearly 60,000.
In 1925, Sun Yat-sen died of illness. Having devoted much of his life to the pursuit of China's revolution and modernization, he never lived to witness the military breakthrough his revolutionary movement was about to achieve.
In 1926, the KMT and CPC jointly launched the Northern Expedition from Guangdong in southern China.
This time, the outcome was dramatically different from Sun's earlier failed military campaigns. The revolutionary forces swept northward, defeating one warlord army after another and advancing rapidly into central and eastern China.
The reunification of China seemed within reach. But just as the revolution appeared to be on the verge of triumph, the alliance that had made it possible began to fall apart.
In the spring of 1927, Chiang Kai-shek, a self-proclaimed disciple of Sun and one of the most powerful commanders of the National Revolutionary Army, launched a purge of Communists. Large numbers of CPC members were slaughtered. Chiang soon took over the supreme leadership within KMT.
For the CPC, this was a struggle for its very survival. On August 1, 1927, Communist leaders, together with units of the National Revolutionary Army under their command or influence, launched an armed uprising in Nanchang (南昌), Jiangxi Province. Other uprisings ensued.
Beginning in 1928, the Communist-led forces gradually adopted the name Red Army. Decades later, August 1 would be designated as the founding anniversary of the People's Liberation Army (PLA). But the Communists now faced a fundamental question:
Where could this newly independent revolutionary army go, and more importantly, how could it survive?
In the early stages of their armed struggle, some CPC leaders, influenced by the Soviet revolutionary experience, believed that capturing major cities was essential to achieving nationwide victory.
Yet China was a very different country from Russia. When the Bolsheviks seized power in 1917, Russia was engulfed in World War I, with much of its army fighting at the front.
The overwhelming majority of China's population lived in the countryside, and major cities were firmly controlled by the KMT and other military forces.
The Communists repeatedly attempted armed uprisings in major cities, only to suffer defeat after defeat.
Mao began charting a different course.
If the Red Army was not yet strong enough to capture major cities, why not turn instead to the countryside, where most Chinese people lived and the KMT's military grip was weaker? There, the Communists could establish revolutionary bases, mobilize the peasantry, build up their armed forces and gain the strength to challenge the KMT.
In the autumn of 1927, Mao led the surviving forces of the Autumn Harvest Uprising to the mountains in Jiangxi and Hunan provinces, where he began establishing a rural revolutionary base.
In 1930, Mao wrote "A Single Spark Can Start a Prairie Fire (星星之火可以燎原)", expressing his conviction that a small revolutionary force could grow into a powerful movement.
In 1931, the Provisional Central Government of the Chinese Soviet Republic was established. Mao was elected chairman of both its Central Executive Committee and its Council of People's Commissars.
It was around this time that the title "Chairman Mao", by which he would later become known around the world, began to gain widespread use.
But as the Red Army grew stronger and its revolutionary bases expanded, Chiang Kai-shek became determined to stamp out the movement.
He wanted to extinguish Mao's spark before it could spread into a prairie fire.
Between 1930 and 1934, the KMT launched five major encirclement and suppression campaigns against the Communist-controlled Central Soviet Area.
The KMT enjoyed overwhelming advantages in manpower, weapons and resources.
Yet its first several campaigns failed to crush the Red Army.
During the earlier campaigns, Mao Zedong played a leading role in directing the Red Army's operations. But by the fifth encirclement campaign, the situation had changed dramatically.
Having learned from his earlier failures, Chiang Kai-shek adopted a new strategy: building fortified blockhouses, advancing step by step, and tightening the economic blockade to steadily squeeze the Red Army's territory.
Meanwhile, Mao Zedong had already been stripped of his main military command responsibilities. In 1934, the Red Army suffered devastating losses, and the situation deteriorated. By October, the Red Army could no longer hold its hard-won revolutionary base.
It faced an agonizing decision: Abandon the territory it had spent years building up and set out into the unknown.
Today, we know the Long March as a historic journey with a clear beginning, an ending, and a place in history. But for the soldiers who embarked on it, the road ahead was filled with uncertainty.
They had to evade enemy forces that vastly outnumbered them while battling hunger, disease, raging rivers, snow-covered mountains and swampy grasslands (bottom left). It was at this desperate moment that Mao Zedong's previously sidelined military ideas began to regain influence. He gradually assumed the leading role in military strategy and in the party again.
As the Red Army struggled to survive, Mao's once-dismissed military ideas began to gain ground. He gradually emerged as the dominant figure in the Party's military leadership.
Against extraordinary odds, the Red Army eventually reached northwestern China, where it found a new foothold.
Why does the Long March hold such special significance for Xi Jinping? Beyond its importance in the history of the CPC, there is a personal connection that many observers may not be fully aware of.
Xi's own family history and formative years are deeply intertwined with northwestern China.
In the 1930s, Xi's father, Xi Zhongxun (习仲勋), together with fellow Communists such as Liu Zhidan (刘志丹), helped establish and expand a revolutionary base along the border between Shaanxi and Gansu provinces.
Its existence played a crucial role in the Central Red Army's decision to establish a new foothold in northern Shaanxi, when the exhausted army finally reached northwestern China after its grueling journey.
In the years that followed, the Communist Party made Yan'an its main center of leadership, rebuilding its strength, promoting a united front against Japanese aggression, and taking part in China's resistance against Japan.
After WWII, the Communists emerged from this northwestern stronghold and, following several years of civil war, established the People's Republic of China in 1949.
Decades later, Xi Jinping's own political journey would also begin in northern Shaanxi. In 1969, not yet 16 years old, Xi left Beijing for a rural village in Yan'an. He spent the next seven years living and working alongside local farmers.
It was in that village that he joined the Communist Party, became the village Party secretary, and developed his understanding of rural life, grassroots society and public service.
For Xi, therefore, Yan'an and northern Shaanxi are more than historic places associated with the Chinese revolution. They are also places that profoundly shaped his own life and political outlook.
As a young man, Xi developed a keen interest in the history of the Long March.
According to the wife of writer Wang Yuanjian, who had interviewed numerous Red Army veterans and devoted much of his work to telling their stories, Xi would carefully take out a notebook and jot down notes whenever Wang recounted their experiences during their conversations in the 1980s.
In the years that followed, both as a provincial official and later as China's top leader, Xi repeatedly visited historic sites along the Long March route.
For Xi, the Long March is far more than a military expedition to be commemorated. It also offers enduring lessons about confronting crises, finding the right path forward, mobilizing the people, and remaining committed to long-term goals.
In the 1930s, the CPC faced a fundamental question: how could it survive military encirclement and a deepening political crisis?
Today, China faces a very different set of challenges. How can a country of more than 1.4 billion people achieve modernization on such an unprecedented scale?
How can it ensure that the benefits of development are shared more widely, rather than concentrated in a handful of regions or among a privileged few?
How can it achieve technological breakthroughs amid intensifying global competition?
How can it continue to grow economically while protecting and restoring the environment?
And how can it stay the course toward its long-term goals amid geopolitical upheaval and growing external pressures?
None of these challenges can be overcome overnight.
As Xi once put it:
"The Long March of our generation is to achieve the Two Centenary Goals and realize the Chinese Dream of national rejuvenation."
In Xi's vision, Chinese modernization means common prosperity for all, cultural and intellectual advancement, harmony between humanity and nature, and national rejuvenation through peaceful development (bottom right).
Since 2012, China has achieved its goal of lifting nearly 100 million rural residents out of extreme poverty, while continuing to invest in infrastructure, industrial upgrading, technological innovation and the transition to greener development.
From electric vehicles and robotics to artificial intelligence and space technology, China is seeking to position itself at the forefront of a new wave of technological change. But these achievements do not mean that China's modernization is complete.
An aging population, regional disparities, technological bottlenecks, foreign trade restrictions and an increasingly complex international security environment all pose long-term challenges.
Xi has often drawn on the imagery of the Long March to describe the difficulties China still faces:
"There are still many 'snowy mountains' and 'grasslands' for us to cross."
Of course, history is not a straight road leading inevitably to victory.
Every major decision during the Long March involved enormous risks, and countless soldiers never lived to see its end. China's subsequent development has also involved setbacks, mistakes, costs and adjustments.
Ninety years ago, the Long March confronted one fundamental question:
How could the Chinese revolution survive and move forward when almost every road seemed blocked?
Ninety years later, Xi's vision of a "new Long March" seeks to answer another:
How can a nation of more than 1.4 billion people chart its own path toward modernization in a world of profound uncertainty and change?
The era has changed. The mission has changed. But for Xi, one spirit remains worth passing down from generation to generation: The determination to hold fast to one's convictions, find a way forward, and keep going, no matter how daunting the obstacles.
And perhaps that is what makes his words on the 90th anniversary of the Long March's victory especially worth reflecting on:
"The history of the Long March has never faded. The journey continues."
JoBot (黃悅寧) retweeted
An entrepreneur cuts up whiskey bottles collected from the trash to make luxury glasses, which he sells — almost at zero cost.
JoBot (黃悅寧) retweeted
In Matmata, Tunisia, generations have lived beneath the desert surface in remarkable underground homes. Carved around deep, open-air courtyards and connected by tunnels, these centuries-old dwellings offer natural protection from the region’s extreme temperatures.
JoBot (黃悅寧) retweeted
The airborne view of this rocket plume is surreal: from deep sunset crimson and amber along the lower contrail up to the electric-blue "space jellyfish" expanding in the mesosphere, the transition reveals Earth's shadow line in real time
JoBot (黃悅寧) retweeted
Groundbreaking botanical research is challenging the long-held belief in human exceptionalism, suggesting that plants possess forms of spatial awareness, intentionality, and consciousness.
For centuries, humans have regarded plants as passive organisms, but pioneering studies are rewriting this view. According to plant neurobiologist Dr. Stefano Mancuso, plants display sophisticated behaviors that parallel those of conscious animals. In laboratory experiments, plants react to anesthesia in ways strikingly similar to humans and animals — for instance, the Venus flytrap becomes completely unresponsive when anesthetized.
Time-lapse studies further reveal remarkable intelligence in common bean plants, which demonstrate clear spatial awareness by precisely aiming shoots toward supports and even adjusting their growth strategy when they detect another plant has already claimed a support.
These findings indicate that consciousness may not be limited to organisms with brains, but could be a more flexible property emerging in diverse life forms. As trees migrate northward in response to climate change, mirroring animal migration, researchers argue that our understanding of “mind” must expand beyond traditional boundaries.
With over three trillion trees on Earth, acknowledging plant consciousness could transform our ethical frameworks, agricultural practices, and relationship with nature, shifting from viewing plants as mere resources to recognizing them as active, aware participants in our shared ecosystem.
[Yokawa, K., Kagenishi, T., Pavlovič, A., Gall, S., Weiland, M., Mancuso, S., & Baluška, F. (2018). Anaesthetics stop diverse plant organ movements, affect endocytic vesicle recycling and ROS homeostasis, and block action potentials in Venus flytraps. Annals of Botany, 122(5), 747–756. DOI: 10.1093/aob/mcx155]
JoBot (黃悅寧) retweeted
Watching him drop the crutches and walk by himself again, I felt happy too.
Chinese exoskeletons exemplify how exactly technology should serve humanity.
JoBot (黃悅寧) retweeted
What makes this story beautiful is not that the bread is cheap.
It is the reciprocity.
People in Xi’an keep showing up for him not only because the naan tastes good or because three giant pieces cost just 10 yuan.
They show up because fame did not make him arrogant.
He did not suddenly raise the price.
He did not rush to monetize the attention.
He did not treat the crowd as something he was entitled to.
Instead, when the queue grew longer, he said he wanted to make the bread bigger because he felt bad that people had waited so long.
And the customers responded in kind.
He thought:
“You waited so long. I don’t want you to lose out.”
They thought:
“You are this sincere. We don’t want you to lose out either.”
That is what makes this more than a viral food story.
It is a small exchange of kindness between strangers.
No contract.
No obligation.
No grand speech.
Just two sides quietly refusing to take advantage of each other.
JoBot (黃悅寧) retweeted
A Chinese story I can't stop thinking about.
Cai Lei was a vice president at JD.com — a workaholic who helped take the company public. In 2019, he was diagnosed with ALS and given two to five years to live.
He didn't retreat. He called it his "final startup."
He went on to build the world's largest grassroots ALS research platform: a patient database of over 20,000 people, hundreds of scientists working together, nearly 300 drug pathways pursued, more than 30 now in clinical trials. His wife Duan Rui left her partnership at an accounting firm to fund the research through livestreaming — over 100 million yuan invested, and she has never taken a cent in salary.
This year, RAG-17, a homegrown drug he helped advance, completed Phase II trials. The findings, published in Nature Medicine: disease-causing proteins in patients' cerebrospinal fluid fell by nearly 60%, and the disease's progression was held back.
Here's the part that stays with me. Cai Lei has sporadic ALS — the drug targets genetic mutations he doesn't have. The medicine he fought so hard for may never save him.
His answer: I'm not trying to save myself. I'm trying to save others. Even if I fall in the darkness before dawn, I'll make sure the path is ready — so those who come after me can stand on my shoulders and step into the sunlight.
Today, only his eyes can move. With an eye-tracking device he types around 60 words a minute and works ten-hour days.
One detail worth noting: after his diagnosis, JD.com introduced a policy to cover the education and living expenses of any employee’s children if the employee suffers a serious tragedy while in service, continuing until the children turn 22. That policy exists because of Cai.
Video: [credit @长歌人物志] | English subtitles auto-generated by AI
JoBot (黃悅寧) retweeted
In response to Japanese Defense Minister Shinjiro Koizumi’s remarks on China’s nuclear arsenal, Beijing’s retort left him virtually no dignity to salvage:
Japanese politicians need remedial lessons in history and international law.
In plain English:
China’s nuclear status is part of the post-war international order.
Japan’s non-nuclear status is also part of the post-war international order.
You do not get to erase the distinction between a victorious power and a defeated aggressor simply because that distinction now makes you uncomfortable.
You are Japan’s defense minister, yet you apparently lack the basic historical and legal knowledge required to discuss your own country’s post-war status.
Go study first.
Imagine being Japan’s defense minister and needing China’s Foreign Ministry to explain why a defeated fascist state does not possess the same post-war rights as the victorious power that defeated it.
JoBot (黃悅寧) retweeted
For thousands of years, the people of China, Japan, Korea, and Vietnam were profoundly impacted by Chinese culture, customs, and values. Until the turn of the twentieth century, written Classical Chinese was the regional lingua franca for literary and scientific interchange, and Chinese characters (汉字/漢字) were regionally adopted in Japan as Kanji (漢字), Korea as Hanja (한자/漢字), and Vietnam as Chữ Hán (𡨸漢).
In late classical history, the literary importance of classical Chinese diminished as Japan, Korea, and Vietnam each adopted their literary device. Japan developed the Katakana (片仮名) and Hiragana (平仮名) scripts, Korea created Hangul (한글), and Vietnam adopted the Vietnamese alphabet, which is based on the Latin alphabet.
The brief history of the Chinese characters used in China, Japan, Korea, and Vietnam is outlined here.
🇨🇳 Chinese characters are logograms developed for the writing of Chinese. Chinese characters are the world's oldest continuously used system of writing and are among the most widely adopted writing systems by the number of users.
According to traditional legend, Chinese characters were invented by Cangjie, a scholar said to have been a scribe to the legendary Yellow Emperor during the 27th century BC. Inspired by his study of the world's animals, the earth's landscape, and the stars in the sky, Cangjie is said to have invented symbols called zì (字) – the first Chinese characters. The legend relates that on the day the characters were created, grain rained down from the sky, and that night, people heard ghosts wailing and demons crying because human beings gained wisdom.
Since the 1950s, the People's Republic of China has officially adopted simplified Chinese characters for use in mainland China, while Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan were not affected by the reform. The use of traditional Chinese versus simplified Chinese characters varies greatly and can depend on local customs and the medium.
🇯🇵 Chinese script was adopted for recording the Japanese language from the 5th century AD.
Chinese characters adapted to write Japanese words are known as kanji. Chinese words borrowed into Japanese could be written with Chinese characters, while native Japanese words could also be written using the character(s) for a Chinese word of similar meaning. Most kanji have both the native (and often multi-syllabic) Japanese pronunciation, known as kun'yomi, and the (mono-syllabic) Chinese-based pronunciation, known as on'yomi.
Modern Japanese writing uses a composite system, using kanji for word stems, hiragana (which were derived from the cursive forms of whole characters) for inflectional endings and grammatical words, and katakana (which were were obtained by selecting a part of each character) to transcribe non-Chinese loanwords as well as serve as a method to emphasize native words.
In Japan, 2,136 Chinese characters are taught through secondary school, and hundreds more are used daily.
🇰🇷🇰🇵 Throughout most of Korean history, as early as the Gojoseon period up until the Joseon Dynasty, Literary Chinese was the dominant form of written communication. Although the Korean alphabet hangul was created in 1443, it did not become widespread official use until the late 19th and early 20th century.
Hanja has become a politically contentious issue in both South and North Korea, with some Koreans urging a "purification" of the national language and culture by totally abandoning their use.
Hanja retains its prominence, especially in Korean academia, as most Korean documents, history, literature and records (such as the Veritable Records of the Joseon Dynasty, among others) were written in Literary Chinese using Hanja as its primary script. Therefore, an excellent working knowledge of Chinese characters is still essential for anyone wishing to interpret and study older texts from Korea or read scholarly texts in the humanities.
JoBot (黃悅寧) retweeted
This is one of the biggest geopolitical mysteries of the year: why did China just save the world economy?
Because, make no mistake, it absolutely did. Analysts are pretty much unanimous on this: had China not dramatically - and I mean dramatically - reduced its oil imports this year, the price of crude oil would have gone through the roof and dragged the global economy down with it.
For proof, read how Javier Blas from Bloomberg - widely recognized as one of the world’s top energy analysts - explains what China did to Jake Sullivan and Jon Finer on their podcast “The Long Game” (thelonggame.substack.com/p/t…).
As Blas puts it, China went “from 11, 12 million barrels a day to less than 6 million barrels a day” of seaborne crude imports, and that “freed a lot of oil for other countries, particularly in Asia.” India, Japan, Korea and Southeast Asia “could buy the barrels that China was not buying.”
To be clear, China wasn’t the only factor - surging US exports and the IEA’s emergency release helped too - but it was by far the biggest: JPMorgan reckons China accounted for about 74% of the fall in global crude trade (fortune.com/2026/06/10/oil-p…).
So it's no exaggeration to say that it is China, first and foremost, that saved the world economy this year.
If you remember the early days of the Iran war, none of this is what was predicted. In fact some US think tankers, such as the (always horrendous) Zineb Riboua from the Hudson Institute, were even cheering the war as being “all about China… the opening act in the larger contest against China,” the moment the US would crack “the central pillar of a regional order that Beijing has assembled” (thefp.com/p/the-iran-strike-…).
Seven months on, what actually happened is that not only did China come out of the war unscathed economically, and strengthened strategically, it also ended up shielding the world economy, America’s included, from the fallout of the very war that was supposed to be its undoing.
Breaking news: if you do something that’s supposed to be a “blow” to someone else - some sort of 3D chess move to gain the upper hand - and they end up having to rescue you from the fallout, maybe it wasn’t such a brilliant strategic move after all.
So how did China pull it off? And, more intriguingly, why did it choose to rescue countries, including the US, from a war that Washington’s own hawks were openly selling as a strike against China itself?
And why do this when it effectively dampened Iran's leverage considerably, even though they're supposed to be China's "ally" (which, as we'll see, is false)?
This is the topic of my latest article. I went very deep researching all the Chinese sources I could find on this, looking at the exact legal mechanisms, and at what officials, oil refiners and state media actually said.
The answer turns out to be far stranger than I expected: no-one in Beijing actually ever ordered an import cut. China, effectively, seems to have saved the world economy incidentally, as a by-product of its own domestic policy to protect Chinese consumers.
Which is the real story here: China has become so large and so important it can just rescue the world economy as a mere side effect.
In fact what I discovered, hilariously, is that the Chinese were just as surprised as anyone else: it’s only weeks after Western media started crediting China with saving the world economy that Chinese media picked up the story. And even then, CCTV’s first take in July (chinanews.com.cn/gj/2026/07-…) presented it as something 外媒称 (wàiméi chēng, “foreign media claim”) 🤣
Almost like a giant suddenly waking up to its own powers. Because, that's the thing: intentions fade, consequences stay. Intentional or not, as Igor Sechin, the head of Rosneft, Russia’s largest oil company, put it (reuters.com/business/aerospa…), the consequence is that it's now China, not OPEC, who calls the shots on global energy markets.
The valve of global oil pricing is now in Shandong, not in Zhongdong anymore (Zhongdong, 中东, is the Middle East in Chinese).
Full article here, with how China’s 20-year strategic nightmare, the “Malacca dilemma”, has now effectively become its leverage over the rest of the world: arnaudbertrand.substack.com/…
JoBot (黃悅寧) retweeted
A video is going viral on Chinese social media of a gem vendor casually selling a full kilogram of lab-grown ruby. The comments are chaos.
People are calling it building material, suggesting it as a dumbbell, or asking if it can prop up a table leg. At a kilo, it’s less jewelry and more construction supply🤣
China is the world’s biggest producer of synthetic gems. Henan alone accounts for most of the global lab-grown diamond rough, while Wuzhou in Guangxi is known as the artificial gem capital, cranking out billions of cubic zirconia and synthetic corundum every year.
On Taobao, 3-carat rubies, sapphires, and diamonds regularly go for the price of a meal. Young buyers are skipping the consumerism markup, grabbing loose stones, and making their own jewelry. What used to be a rare geological miracle is now just affordable material.
Lab-grown and natural gems are essentially identical in composition, structure, hardness, and optics. The only real difference is origin and growth time.
Turns out “gem freedom” is just scale and practicality.
JoBot (黃悅寧) retweeted
A good friend's mum sent me this video of her team dancing at an event in their compound here in Shanghai.
This is a really interesting phenomenon in China.
Many retired women (and men) will join dancing groups as a hobby after retiring. That's something most people know already.
But an interesting aspect I guess a lot of people don't know about is just how early women can retire in China, as opposed to many Western nations.
In China today, women in standard jobs can retire at 50 years of age: that's right, 50! (Although it is slowly changing to 55).
The age for some other female workers at the moment, like female managers and other leaders, is 55.
Let's compare that to female retirement age in some Western nations, shall we?
The age in New Zealand is 65; Australia is 67; the USA is also 67. So basically, in the West we are worked to the bone, and get just a few years of retirement.
And get this: the average life expectancy in China is the same as the United States: 79 years of age. So in China, that's nearly 30 years of retirement and leisure. In the US, just 12!
In China, therefore, hobbies are extremely important! One of the popular ones is dancing groups.
My friend's mum has led this group for years, and is extremely proud of their performances and achievements.
I mean, look at the dance routines. Could you remember all those moves? I couldn't!
And then there's the outfits, which are all custom made by members of the team.
They meet weekly to come up with new routines, find new songs, think up new outfits to make, and check which events are coming up that they might be able to take part in.
The event they were taking part in in the video below is one organized by the community.
And like I mentioned, the age for female retirement is 50. That's not old by any means, so it is really important that women coming out of busy work lives still have things to do once they are out of the work force.
Another big one is travel groups. My same friend's mum has traveled a lot and, especially before COVID, that included overseas trips. Italy, Japan, Russia. All with other retirees.
Their last trip was a cruise if I remember correctly.
So next time you hear people talking repeating anti-China propaganda about hUmAn RiGhTs when it comes to work and time off blah blah blah, ask them to compare China's retirement age with theirs.
I reckon they'll be shocked!
JoBot (黃悅寧) retweeted
✨🇨🇳Shenzhen, China has deployed drone docking stations on traffic light poles. These drones automatically take off during rush hours to monitor traffic, issue warnings, and return to the stations to recharge when their tasks are done.
JoBot (黃悅寧) retweeted
People in China are surpised a Westerner would make a tribute song for their leaders. Well, it goes to show how impactful red tourism can be on foreigners and why China should make red tourism more accessible to foreigners. Here's the song with Chinese subtitles.
JoBot (黃悅寧) retweeted
Extremely wise words by Shivshankar Menon, India's former Foreign Secretary and National Security Advisor.
Asked by the host what worries him about India - what is a burden of history for India - he replied that "there is such a thing as excessive pride in your past."
He explains that talking of "your glorious golden ages in the past" to "feel good about yourself" is ok - a normal aspect of building an identity for yourself - but "when you then carry it on into victimhood and into revenge for history" and when that becomes a driving force for today's actions, then it becomes "dangerous."
He takes the example of people in India speaking about "a thousand years of slavery" (meaning Muslim and then British rule) or of Chiang Kai-shek writing every night in the top right of his diary "never forget national humiliation" (I checked and he actually wrote 雪耻 - xuě chǐ - which means "avenge the humiliation": thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forwa…, he did it from 1928 until his last diary entry in July 1972).
It's a wise point in general: when you think about it, nationalism isn't necessarily destructive in and of itself. But it becomes so when you convince yourself as a nation or people that you are a victim and that there is a guilty party. Because, as Menon puts it, it makes you "stop dealing with reality as it is" and leads to "counterproductive policy and ideas."
All the more dangerous because it’s so easy: nothing easier as a people, or as the ruler of a nation, than to blame others for what’s wrong. It spares you the much harder work of looking at your own failings, and absolves the rulers of responsibility.
And the inverse is really hard: nothing harder when you have indeed been a victim than to resist turning that grievance into a political program, and to instead focus on what you can actually build today - which often involves working hand in hand with the guilty party.
Which is, incidentally, why what China did was so impressive. It could have turned national humiliation into policies of revenge and hatred but instead chose to define it largely as China's own mistake for having been weak enough that foreigners could take advantage of that (Xi Jinping himself defines it that way in his book: xitter.cf/RnaudBertrand/status/2…). Which is constructive, because then the objective isn't revenge but building yourself, and China did that working hand in hand with the West.
We’re seeing some version of victimhood drive policies in too many countries around the world. Europe is, sadly, a case in point: Russia and China have become the all-purpose explanation for almost every problem on the continent, from energy prices to deindustrialization. Very practical for EU leaders who never have to answer for their own choices...
It's a good rule of thumb to have: if any politician builds his message around blame, take it as a red flag. That's what you reach for when you won't build.
This is the source video, by the way: youtube.com/watch?v=IQ2ns6-C… On the WorldView Postcast of my friend @Hansong_Li
This is genuinely shocking, and says so much about our approach to China.
I decided to check for independent reviews of the English version Xi Jinping's latest book, published a year ago, to see what people had to say about it since I hadn't read it myself.
To my surprise, I couldn't find any: not a single thoughtful review about the book out there! Even on Amazon, check it for yourself (amazon.com/XI-JINPING-GOVERN…): the book has only 3 ratings, that's it.
No matter where you stand on China, you’ve got to admit that’s pretty crazy: the sitting president of the world's rising superpower publishes a 700-page book explaining exactly what he's doing and why, and we don’t even care to look.
If there ever was a fact that illustrates just how willfully ignorant we are about China, this is it.
All the more because we then go spew the usual clichés around how secretive and impenetrable the Chinese system is: the book is on Amazon for $21 for crying out loud!
Anyhow, this felt so wrong that I figured I'd fix it. I bought the book, read it attentively and wrote what I hope you'll agree is a thoughtful review of it.
The book contains genuinely surprising passages, such as Xi writing that oversight of the Communist Party by "the judiciary, the public, and the media" was not just something the Party must “readily accept,” but something that he framed as historically decisive - an essential component to "escaping the historical cycle of rise and fall" that has doomed every dynasty in China's history.
Other passage that I'm sure would surprise many: a common narrative out there is that China blames the West for the century of humiliation and is driven by revenge. Well, Xi explains that's not true at all: the century of humiliation was China's own mistake, originated in the Ming Dynasty's disastrous "policy of national seclusion" that "resulted in China missing out on the opportunities presented by the Industrial Revolution" and "led to China’s decline."
All in all, the book is remarkably self-reflective and thoughtful. For instance Xi recognizes that his drive for “full and rigorous internal governance” - including to rid the Party of corruption - risked "instill[ing] fear and apprehension, or intimidate members into inaction.” He emphasizes the need for pragmatism in this regard, codified in a framework called the “Three Distinctions” that separates honest mistakes - made while experimenting, reforming, or operating without precedent - from deliberate violations committed for personal gain.
And many other surprises still. I found it a genuinely fascinating read for anyone interested in how the Chinese system works and how Xi thinks - or anyone interested in governance, period, as so much of what he writes is pretty universally applicable.
This is the link to my review of the book, an article I titled "The Book the West Refuses to Read": open.substack.com/pub/arnaud…


































