From Opium to Algorithms
A Conversation on History, Power, and the Chinese Strategy
Unlike the rest of the world, where TikTok dominates youth culture, the app is not even available inside China. Instead, its domestic counterpart, Douyin, is tightly regulated: young users face strict screen-time limits, algorithmic nudges toward educational or patriotic content, and a broader ecosystem of state-approved digital tools. These measures reflect more than just concern about digital addiction—they reveal how China views media as an instrument to implement national strategy.
It is a mystery for no one that TikTok is owned by ByteDance, a Chinese technology company founded in Beijing in 2012. So why would the Chinese government forbid such a successful Chinese social medium on their own territory? This might seem like the Chinese revenge to the Opium Wars and the Century of Humiliation.
The idea of this article stemmed from a brief comment made online, drawing a parallel between the psychological grip of the Opium Wars and the digital influence of platforms like TikTok today. This comparison sparked the interest of one of our students. What followed was a rich exchange—one that highlighted how historical awareness can inform our understanding of contemporary geopolitics.
The Long View: History as Strategy
The Chinese political leadership approaches history not as a subject of passive remembrance but as a strategic asset. With long-term horizons that extend far beyond Western electoral cycles, China’s ruling class draws on historical precedent to inform its modern statecraft.
This stands in stark contrast to the Western approach, particularly in Europe—where historical education often focuses inward, and rarely delves into key events such as the Opium Wars or their lasting implications.
In the Western world, the approach toward time and therefore to History is based on a few underlying principles. First, time is linear and oriented towards cumulative “progress” (this linear conception of time is inherited from the emergence of mercantile capitalism in the Middle Age, which broke with the circular conception imposed by natural and religious rhythms), second, it is marked by “important dates” that punctuate its course and underpin its narrative (1212, 1492, 1789, 1812, etc.) and, third, dialectical forces are its driving engine (Plato, Hegel, Marx, etc.). All that means that the Western world, until probably the beginning of the XXI° century, believed that time is a vector, pointing toward a promising future for everyone, at least for those who embark on capitalist adventure! Clearly, the concept of time in the East, at least in the Middle Kingdom, is much less impudent and triumphant.
Unless one follows a specialized academic path, many of these foundational episodes in global history remain peripheral or completely absent from public education. Even in EU business schools, the study of the history of economic thought, economic cycles, or even financial crises remains marginal.
Education and the Shaping of National Identity
One of the key points we discussed was the role of historical education as a vehicle for national identity and, in some cases, ideological alignment. In China, history is deeply embedded in school curricula and serves as a powerful tool of collective narrative-building. It not only reinforces a shared identity but also supports a broader strategic agenda.
Western nations also engage in narrative construction—but often in a fragmented, inconsistent manner. Propaganda exists in all societies, but its coherence and effectiveness vary. In France, for instance, educational programs emphasize European integration and national achievements, but do so with less ideological unity than seen in the Chinese system.
Looking at the French, they seem to have a recurring passion for rewriting history, marked by wars, colonization, monarchy, power struggles, and revolution. Since the beginning of the 21st century, they have been gripped by a “disenchantment” with the world that boils down to the fact that revolution is neither feasible nor even desirable, that wealth gaps are irreparable, and that the supposedly promising future is no longer what it used to be, hence, resignation, resentment, and frustration, all three of which are breeding grounds for societal violence.
Those who live in the Middle Kingdom do not share these qualms for two reasons. First, because China's growth trend is still upward, even if it has been slowing down for the past ten years (a necessary condition to curb overheating and inflation), and second, because China's control system is repressive enough to stifle any dissent. Today, the tanks in Tiananmen Square have become unnecessary: digital control over social media makes military intervention unnecessary.
Individualism vs. Collectivism
At the heart of these differences is a deeper cultural divide. Chinese society tends to operate on collectivist principles, where the interests of the group are prioritized over those of the individual. This stands in contrast to Western liberal democracies, where personal freedoms are paramount. The Chinese ability to unify around a national vision—underpinned by collective memory—seems to be a key factor in the country’s continued rise. That being said, collective memory probably translates into social strength: it reduces centrifugal forces providing a framework that brings people together and unifies them, ignoring dissent.
Since the purpose (and tone) of this paper is not to aim for academic rigor, but rather to offer food for thought, we could summarize the differences in the conception of temporality between the West (at least Europe) and China in two points. Even at the risk of trivializing! First, Chinese history is one of great shifts, of “eras” linked to dynasties (around 18), far removed from the dates of epic battles that mark European history. Second, and less seriously, one need only compare two popular sports. One is that of Chinese workers and retirees practicing tai chi in groups at the doorsteps of their apartment buildings in Dushu Lake near Suzhou or in the working-class neighborhood of Caoyang in Shanghai. Time is not limited, or rather, they are all focused on the present: order, social discipline, and collective harmony. The other sporting practice, that of the West, is the individualistic one of young professionals who stubbornly lift weights while counting their reps or do abdominal crunches, their eyes fixed on a television screen, while thinking about their upcoming meetings or conference calls… Time is running out and there's not a minute to lose.
Soft Power and the "Win-Win" Narrative
Another important theme is China’s contemporary diplomacy, particularly its self-presentation as a “partner” rather than an imperial power. This “win-win” rhetoric has gained traction in parts of the Global South, especially in Africa and Latin America, where memories of Western colonialism remain fresh. China’s emphasis on mutual benefit contrasts with the top-down approach historically favored by Western powers during the 20th century. China, clearly, has never fallen into the arrogance (and imprudence) of formulating it’s own “Monroe Doctrine”, what US President James Monroe announced in December 1823, claiming a duty of disseminating the seeds of “moral civilization” while warning European nations that further colonization or puppet monarchs would not be tolerated! Meanwhile, China is advancing its interests in Africa, Central Europe, and Latin America, i.e., in all countries with mineral resources, rare earths, and hydrocarbons. For their part, former colonial countries, particularly in Europe, face the stigma of history and are forced to acknowledge their indelible “historical responsibility”. In a way, time catches up with them and prevents historical amnesia: the past creates a stubborn liability.
The discussion also touched on the contradictions within this approach. Instances of “land grabbing”—such as the leasing of strategic ports or vast agricultural tracts in exchange for debt—reveal a different side to China’s global expansion. Still, such practices are hardly new. From the Roman Empire to the colonial West, powerful states have always used economic leverage to secure influence.
Geopolitics as a Battle of Narratives
What emerged clearly from this exchange is the idea that global competition today is as much about narratives as it is about economics or military power. Narratives have a two-fold role, both internal and external. On the internal side, they help to build a collective memory and thus to create, as an extension of the past, a common future. This is what distinguishes a country (population in a territory) from a nation (population united by a common identity). A nation is entirely rooted in a unifying past and in the oblivion of people’s origins. On the external side, narratives convey a sense of unity, strength, and resilience through the turbulences of history. Narratives are a key ingredient, today, of soft power!
While the West promoted liberal democratic values during the 20th century, that ideological model appears increasingly strained. China, on the other hand, offers a different kind of story—one rooted in historical grievance, national pride, and a vision of collective strength.
This ideological divide is shaping the way nations relate to one another and how populations understand their place in the world. It also affects how policies are justified domestically and how influence is projected abroad.
Further Reading and Reflection
To deepen the discussion, we exchanged reading recommendations. Alexandre suggested The Changing World Order and How Countries Go Broke by Ray Dalio—books that analyze long-term cycles of power from the perspective of a financial market participant rather than a traditional historian. Michel suggested: Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk, by Peter L. Bernstein. (Wiley & Sons, 1996), a comprehensive history of man's efforts to understand risk, power, and time, from early gamblers in ancient Greece up to modern globalized financial markets! These works offer valuable insights into how historical patterns influence modern economic dynamics.
The student referenced The Open Veins of Latin America by Eduardo Galeano—an essential read for understanding the historical roots of North-South relations and the long shadow of Western interventionism. These contrasting lenses—market-oriented and anti-colonial—enriched the dialogue and emphasized the importance of multidisciplinary perspectives.
Conclusion
This conversation, sparked by a simple comment, evolved into a broader reflection on the enduring influence of history on current events. In an increasingly multipolar world, understanding the past is not optional—it is essential. Whether through education, culture, or economic policy, nations continue to weaponize memory and narrative.
What we’re witnessing is not just a competition between economies or technologies, but a battle of collective imaginations—where platforms like TikTok might just play the role that opium once did: not to destroy through violence, but to influence through the mind. And let us not take this power of influence lightly, because in extreme cases it can be a vehicle for violence.
Note: This article is based on an informal exchange with a student and reflects personal reflections and opinions.