While presiding over the Chinese Communist Party Central Committee Political Bureau’s meeting on Oct. 24, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) said that blockchain technology would play a key role in the next phase of China’s technological development, and the nation must be at the forefront of theory and innovation in the industry, building an advantage.
Looking at Xi’s plans, Taiwanese might believe that the next big trend will be blockchain technology, and express disappointment that Taiwan lags behind in this field.
However, it is more important to consider the contradiction between the fundamental nature and spirit of blockchain technology on the one hand and Chinese governance mechanisms on the other. The discrepancy is so obvious that it makes Chinese policymakers appear a bit muddle-headed.
Blockchain technology emphasizes decentralization, as each user can add new content to a chain and is responsible for verifying the accuracy of past data.
In a totalitarian nation like China, the government clings to all the power. If everyone is participating in blockchain technology, how could the government retain centralized control of speech and expression, or disseminate party doctrine and manage online activity? This is the first contradiction.
Blockchain technology is valuable because data on a blockchain cannot be easily falsified and it confirms the integrity of the blocks.
As the data and records cannot be changed, how would the provincial governments forge their economic data, and how would the government remove unfavorable online content or block search results containing certain keywords?
Clearly, blockchain technology is inconvenient for a totalitarian government. This is the second contradiction.
A characteristic of blockchain technology is the anonymity it provides. This is one reason the cryptocurrency bitcoin is almost untraceable, making it a popular tool for money laundering.
However, in China, people have to scan their faces just to be able to log on to the Internet, and all online activity is done under the user’s real name.
How can Beijing possibly tolerate the existence of a technology that protects people’s privacy and their anonymity? This is the third contradiction.
The Chinese government and blockchain technology are clearly incompatible. That being so, what does Xi have up his sleeve?
Perhaps what he really wants to push for is “blockchain with Chinese characteristics.”
For example, when it comes to changing blockchain data, perhaps Beijing would be the only user permitted to do so, allowing it to remain anonymous and untraceable when monitoring other Internet users. Meanwhile all other Internet users would need to fully disclose their identities online and so on.
We need to be cautious with any blockchain applications that the Chinese government might push for.
Beijing would never do anything that diminishes its grip on power.
Chao Shih-wei is an employee of an intellectual property law firm.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Shortly after Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) stepped down as general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in 2012, his successor, Xi Jinping (習近平), articulated the “Chinese Dream,” which aims to rejuvenate the nation and restore its historical glory. While defense analysts and media often focus on China’s potential conflict with Taiwan, achieving “rejuvenation” would require Beijing to engage in at least six different conflicts with at least eight countries. These include territories ranging from the South China Sea and East China Sea to Inner Asia, the Himalayas and lands lost to Russia. Conflicts would involve Taiwan, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia,
The Sino-Indian border dispute remains one of the most complex and enduring border issues in the world. Unlike China’s borders with Russia and Vietnam, which have seen conflicts, but eventually led to settled agreements, the border with India, particularly the region of Arunachal Pradesh, remains a point of contention. This op-ed explores the historical and geopolitical nuances that contribute to this unresolved border dispute. The crux of the Sino-Indian border dispute lies in the differing interpretations of historical boundaries. The McMahon Line, established by the 1914 Simla Convention, was accepted by British India and Tibet, but never recognized by China, which
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) continues to bully Taiwan by conducting military drills extremely close to Taiwan in late May 2024 and announcing a legal opinion in June on how they would treat “Taiwan Independence diehards” according to the PRC’s Criminal Code. This article will describe how China’s Anaconda Strategy of psychological and legal asphyxiation is employed. The CCP’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) conducted a “punishment military exercise” against Taiwan called “Joint Sword 2024A” from 23-24 May 2024, just three days after President William Lai (賴清德) of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was sworn in and
In a recent interview with the Malaysian Chinese-language newspaper Sin Chew Daily, former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) called President William Lai (賴清德) “naive.” As always with Ma, one must first deconstruct what he is saying to fully understand the parallel universe he insists on defending. Who is being “naive,” Lai or Ma? The quickest way is to confront Ma with a series of pointed questions that force him to take clear stands on the complex issues involved and prevent him from his usual ramblings. Regarding China and Taiwan, the media should first begin with questions like these: “Did the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)