Sometimes it’s hard to believe that the year is 2010. Cold War rhetoric still abounds, particularly when nationalism and culture is at issue. Consider this recent discussion about the price variance of foreign artistic performances in China and their domestic counterparts overseas:

With the price of artistic performances staged by foreign troupes in China about ten times that of Chinese performances staged overseas, the nation is endeavoring to reduce the cultural trade deficit by boosting the competitiveness of its artistic exports.

IP geek that I am, the first thing I thought of was the government’s longstanding wish to somehow get out from under the payment of technology license fees to foreign companies. Private enterprises in China first accomplished this feat by simply infringing on patents, while newer official policies strive to do so through domestic innovation (a.k.a. “We don’t need your stinking patented technology anymore”).

One could also use the China’s trade surplus as an example, or maybe food security policy. China is big on self-sufficiency, so I suppose that this “cultural trade deficit” really annoys the folks at the Ministry of Culture, particularly since the numbers show a stark contrast:

[D]ata shows revenue from Chinese commercial performances staged overseas is less than 100 million U.S. dollars a year, which is less than the annual revenue of one well-known foreign circus.

This just adds insult to injury. Less revenue than a well-known circus? Ouch. On the other hand, I can understand the disparity. Circuses are expensive. You have to feed the elephants, constantly replace the guy that gets shot out of a cannon, send the bearded lady to the hairdresser — these things add up.

On the other hand, your average Shaolin monk or Chinese acrobat gets a bowl of rice, some pickled vegetables, and maybe a chicken wing as remuneration for their services. Labor is pretty cheap on the China culture circuit.

All of this is already rather “us versus them” in tone, which is slightly off-putting, but it gets worse. Check out what Wu Huanqing, apparently an expert in this field, had to say about this disparity:

When one culture is relatively weak, stronger ones will invade it and bring about a cultural trade deficit. In history, many Western countries also suffered such ‘cultural aggression’.

We’re now in solid Cold War rhetoric territory. Discussing the domination of a “strong” culture against a “weak” one, resulting in a culture gap, sounds suspiciously like our old friend General Turgidson frothing at the mouth at the end of Doctor Strangelove:

I think it would be extremely naive of us, Mr. President, to imagine that these new developments are going to cause any change in Soviet expansionist policy.

I mean, we must be increasingly on the alert to prevent them from taking over other mineshaft space, in order to breed more prodigiously than we do, thus, knocking us out in superior numbers when we emerge! Mr. President, we must not allow… a mine shaft gap!

If the discussion is about the price difference between Chinese acrobats and Canadian circuses, it’s probably not a good idea to lapse into language that compares favorably to Cold War satire. The next thing you know, the government will get involved, drawing lines in the sand, talking about pushing back against the culture war, and making threats.

The last time I heard someone say “This will not stand, ya know, this aggression will not stand, man,” things did not end all that well for him. Let’s hope that the “culture gap” does not provoke a violent response.