For the last two decades, this kind of “word spam” has gained currency in trash talk about nations or ancient cultures that are not stuck in a sham political, or cultural, McDonalds-ization. Those not hip enough able to understand pop politics (more commonly known as the Britney Spears Doctrine) are out. Quick headlines are more important than understanding some 20% of the world’s population. For whatever reason, it is convenient to label 1.3 billion Chinese or a billion Muslims with irresponsible terminology, or to “obliterate” them in a cheap run of poorly-chosen words. Some declared the end of history to send away the need for understanding others, and their millennia of behavior or tradition, in a single step. The hyper-shallow end of the thinking pool wish to add Iran, Korea, or bits of the former USSR to a quick lumping of Eastern Europe or Arabic-speaking tribes or Spanish-speaking immigrants in North America and Iraqis in simplified pockets of imagination in their word spam. In turn, the folly and the transparent paranoia cannot help but jump out in the same hysterical, in-your-face pointlessness.

A quick review of the post-World War news and “analysis” in the English-speaking world shows that, at one time or another, all of these countries have been superficially portrayed as mad mobs of angry and illogical people, ruled by ill-willed leaders, or that a cartoonish black portrait telegraphs the end of world. That is probably the biggest, if not the most visible, threat of all. Such simplification is rare in other languages.

Now, as to the question itself: For the foreseeable future, China will continue its path of development. The rest of the world is not in a position to stop, disarm or influence China with threats of force, sanctions, or a rerun of the Cold War. The real threat will inevitably fly in the face of “the West” if only the time is taken to think through the impact of it all. A few rudimentary examples will include the loss of the most promising market by most industrial giants (say, Boeing, Airbus and engine makers.) Wal-Mart will lose its suppliers, and the profits of direct investors--about 55% of revenues of the (partially) state-owned Volkswagen-- will dry up. In turn, their host governments will lose tax revenue and turn to their taxpayers to replace that funding, and the entire economic model in the globalized world will halt as the members of the Rich Club are also the countries with the least amount of foreseeable growth.

Unlike the imagined one-size-fits-all approach, China has its own cultural quilt of different ethnic groups (and regional languages) and its own problems, most of which are unique throughout history. The country is in a process of a very noticeable, but cautious, stepping away from its hardliner communist doctrines. There are forces of new socio-economic changes made and demanded by members of a new generation who are much better off than their parents. There is a concurrent widening gap of disposable income for the people in the southeast of the country (when compared to the hinterland and north-western territories) and there are massive internal migrations of Chinese work force. And like other countries, there are long-term worries and uncertainties about pensions, healthcare for an aging population, and unstoppable demand for electricity and commodities. The Chinese are no different than others in the world as they deal with pollution or other challenges of modern life.

Learning about and understanding foreign cultures is hard work, but not avoidable in our inter-connected and imperfect world. As my PostGlobal colleague Miklos Vamos has mentioned, it does not hurt to start studying Chinese.