I feel somewhat obligated to respond to the latest Washington Post poll on American views of China. It’s not that I think it’s a good poll or that the results matter to most people, but the whole US-China perception subject is one of my “things.” Moreover, these ridiculous polls have a tendency to have an exaggerated effect on policy making. So here goes.

First, the questions themselves.

Well, I’m not sure what the point was in asking these questions. The first one seems like it was designed to get a particular answer (i.e., the U.S. role will be smaller). They started off saying the U.S. was dominant, then ask whether that trend will continue. Since the U.S. economy is in the toilet right now, the results are not surprising (about half the people thought the U.S. role in world affairs and economy would be smaller). I’m actually surprised that those numbers weren’t higher.

As to the second question, I am amused by the “Just your best guess . . .” What the hell does that mean, anyway? As opposed to citing Dr. Kissinger or Minxin Pei? The choice of the U.S. or China only also sets up a very nice bi-polar mindset, which of course influences the response to the last question. (The responses to question #2, by the way, were more or less split between U.S. and China.)

The third question asks respondents to evaluate the effects of a diminished role of the U.S. Again, the simplicity here is the killer. Consider these two possible scenarios:

1. In the year 2046, after being invaded and occupied by Canada and forced to live in gulags where only bad French is spoken, the U.S. role in world in world affairs is significantly diminished.

2. In the year 2046, after world organizations such as the UN, IMF, World Bank, and WTO become increasingly popular and effective, the U.S. gives up some of its sovereign authority to the New World Order.

To me, I would consider a diminished U.S. role in the world in scenario #1 to be a bad thing, while scenario #2 would be an excellent thing. Sadly the poll is unable to “do the nuance thing” and discriminate between such outcomes.

The responses to question #3 show that few respondents thought a diminished U.S. role was a good thing, while the rest were split between “bad” and “neither good nor bad.”

The Post article discussing the results summed up thusly:

The results are consistent with recent polls by Gallup, the Pew Research Center and others that have tracked a significant public concern about China’s growing prominence on the world stage[.]

Well, sure. First you tell people that their country was dominant in the world but may not be in the future. You then suggest, by the phrasing of the next question, that the only choice to U.S. dominance is that of China. Finally you ask whether that China takeover sounds good or bad.

Should we be surprised at numbers that reflect “public concern?” Also keep in mind that, poll questions notwithstanding, Americans are bombarded with negative China stories on a daily basis regarding trade, currency, dollar investments — the list goes on. Check out this follow up response to the polling:

Jordan, a mother of two from Sandoval, N.M., was working at a cellular telephone plant in the early 1990s as production and hiring were ramped up. By 1992, the plant had 3,200 workers. “Then this whole China thing started and we were very quickly training Chinese to take our jobs,” she said. Now the plant has 100 people left. “We’re transferring our wealth to China,” she said. “I see that as a very negative thing.”

The Post article then includes a bunch of good quotes from China experts, including Bonnie Glaser from CSIS and my old prof David Lampton at SAIS. They talk about public perception (or misperception, as the case may be) and its effect on government policy, a very real problem.

I agree, but of course that all presupposes that these poll results reflect the public’s belief that China is out to get them. I think the same mindset that produced those leading questions is also filtering the responses, so they get the results they wanted in the first place: people are worried about China.

They can then unleash their staff writers to produce set pieces supporting that well-established meme. And then what happens next? Jokers like Chuck Schumer in the Senate and Thad McCotter in the House use the poll results to fuel and justify their China bashing, albeit for different reasons (Schumer on the trade side, McCotter because he’s bat shit crazy and believes China is full of evil, dirty Commies.