Category: Uncategorized

By Claire DIVISIA

In April 2025, a seemingly innocuous post by Twitter user @girl_virus declared: “you met me at a very chinese time in my life.” What began as a parody of a quote from the cult classic Fight Club quickly mutated into a defining cultural trend for Gen Z: “becoming Chinese,” or “Chinamaxxing.” Becoming Chinese has been defined as a social media trend popularized by Generation Z, and particularly prevalent among those living in the West, who adopt norms and traditions typically associated with Chinese culture, or express public praise for China as a country and nation (South China Morning Post, 2026). While the origins of the meme date back to early 2025, it began widespread circulation across Tiktok and other social media platforms in 2026 (Price, 2026). But beneath the viral videos of influencers drinking hot water or unboxing Labubu dolls lies a deeper story: an entire generation’s growing disillusionment with the American Dream.

This phenomenon started with consumerism. For years, “Made in China” was a label looked down upon in the West, but today, these products, from Labubu dolls to Temu furniture, have become desirable. Market data shows that Pop Mart, the company behind the viral Labubu figurines, made roughly $870 million in just the first half of 2024 (Bharade & Liam, 2025). Meanwhile, Chinese e-commerce giants like Taobao have surged to the top of App Store charts in the US, Canada and France in 2025. But the spread of “Chineseness” hasn’t stopped at viral products; it has entered people’s lifestyles. Mandarin learning on Duolingo spiked by 216% in early 2026, at the same time as Tiktok users migrated in a cohort of over 700 million ‘refugees’ to RedNote (Xiaohongshu) (Perez, 2025). Searches for “Traditional Chinese Medicine” also reached peak popularity this year as young Westerners trade coffee for hot water and embrace Chinese routines like eating congee and wearing slippers around the house. For many, these practices offer a sense of discipline and wellness that feels missing in the chaotic, high-stress environment of Western late-stage capitalism.

Why is this happening now? The answer is as much about Washington as it is about Beijing. While China is enjoying a rise in popularity, favorability for the West, notably the United States, is plummeting (Schulman & Silver, 2026). Following the 2024 US election and a series of controversial reforms, trust in Western institutions has severely eroded (Eddy & Shearer, 2025). In 2014, 75% of people in France viewed the US favorably (Statista 2025a); by 2025, that number dropped to 36% (Statista 2025b). As the “American Dream” feels increasingly unattainable due to rising costs of living and political instability, China’s model is being re-evaluated by Gen Z. While the West faces recession fears, China has reached a 90% urban homeownership rate (Jin, 2023) and eradicated extreme poverty for 800 million people (World Bank Group, 2023). Beijing has also gotten smarter about its image, employing increasingly efficient soft power tactics through social media. Instead of rigid political propaganda, they are harnessing the “attention economy” by inviting influencers to share “authentic” experiences of the utopias they encounter in China’s big cities like Chongqing and Shanghai. This “memetic warfare,” using memes and viral content to fight ideological battles, has successfully rebranded China as the cool, efficient alternative to a declining West.

However, we need to look at this trend with a critical eye. Most Americans “becoming Chinese” aren’t engaging with the actual, complex reality of life in the PRC. Instead, they are consuming a “hyperreal” version: a curated, frictionless fantasy designed to absorb the West’s grievances. By over-idealizing China as a response to their own political frustrations, many are falling into a trap of what the sociologist Colin Campbell calls “imaginative hedonism.” The Western audience selectively chooses aspects of China to praise and daydream about, deriving pleasure from it, instead of actually engaging with the actual, complex reality of the state (Urry, 2002). This binary thinking, leading “anti-US” sentiments of the Western youth to evolve into “pro-China” ones often overlooks serious issues, such as the treatment of ethnic Tibetan and Uyghur minorities, in favor of the smooth, one-dimensional facade portrayed through memes and short-form online content. 

In a similar vein, this trend risks the  commodification of racial differences. When we reduce a country’s culture to a “trend” or a “meme,” we engage in a form of cultural consumption that famous author bell hooks described as “eating the other” (hooks, 1992). We treat Chinese culture like a “spice” to liven up our own lives without actually respecting the history or the struggles of the people behind it. We can wear Adidas CNY jackets and drink Tsingtao beer, but we don’t have to face the systemic discrimination that many of Chinese descent actually experience in the West. Ultimately, this trend is just an “era” that will also come to an end as the Internet moves on to another culture to center on, as easily disposable as a SHEIN piece of clothing. China is just an “Other” that will ultimately be “eaten, consumed, and forgotten,” inscribing itself in a long history of Edward Said’s Orientalism (Said, 1973).

Perhaps the most concerning part of this correlation between “becoming Chinese” memes and the tendency of falling into a dualist nature of discourse of “good VS. bad” is what it says about our current capacity for nuance. While the trend is broadly a force for good, combating decades of anti-Chinese propaganda from the West, we seem to have lost the ability to hold two truths at once: that the Western model is currently failing many of its citizens, and that the alternative rising to meet it has its own, deep flaws. 

The “Chinese Era” of social media proves that we are desperate for a different way of living, but we won’t find it by simply swapping one idealized superpower for another. True progress requires us to stop looking for a “default” model, critiquing both systems honestly, and fixing their issues. Until we can move past the binary of “Western failure vs. Eastern success,” we aren’t actually protesting the status quo, we’re just continuing to scroll through it, with no action taken. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bharade, A., & Liam, E. (2025, May 19). A fluffy, $85 toy is taking Asia by storm and sparking legions of knockoffs. Inside the meteoric rise of Labubu. Business Insider. https://www.businessinsider.com/inside-rise-labubu-monsters-popmart-toy-adults-china-sold-out-2024-11 

Eddy, K., & Shearer, E. (2025, October 29). How trust in info from news outlets and social media has changed over time. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/10/29/how-americans-trust-in-information-from-news-organizations-and-social-media-sites-has-changed-over-time/ 

hooks, b. (1992). Black looks: Race and Representation. South End Press.

Jin, K. (2023). The new China Playbook: Beyond Socialism and Capitalism. National Geographic Books.

Perez, S. (2025, January 15). Duolingo sees 216% spike in US users learning Chinese amid TikTok ban and move to RedNote. TechCrunch. https://techcrunch.com/2025/01/15/duolingo-sees-216-spike-in-u-s-users-learning-chinese-amid-tiktok-ban-and-move-to-rednote/ 

Price, J. (2026, January 15). 2026 is the Year Everyone Wants to “Become Chinese”: What to Know About the Viral TikTok Trend. Complex. https://www.complex.com/pop-culture/a/backwoodsaltar/viral-tiktok-trend-2026-become-chinese 

Said, E. W. (1979). Orientalism. Vintage.

Schulman, J., & Silver, L. (2026, March 26). US favorability down, China favorability up in many countries. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/07/15/views-of-the-us-have-worsened-while-opinions-of-china-have-improved-in-many-surveyed-countries/ 

South China Morning Post. (2026, February 22). Why Americans are ‘becoming Chinese’ [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmeoCECiyVE 

Statista. (2025a, November 28). Public views on U.S. favorability, by country 2014. https://www.statista.com/statistics/233020/global-views-on-us-favorability/ 

Statista. (2025b, November 28). Views on the United States and China worldwide 2025, by country. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1480392/opinion-us-china-world-country/ 

Urry, J. (2002). The tourist gaze. SAGE.

World Bank Group. (2023, September 25). Lifting 800 Million People Out of Poverty – New Report Looks at Lessons from China’s Experience. World Bank. https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2022/04/01/lifting-800-million-people-out-of-poverty-new-report-looks-at-lessons-from-china-s-experience 

By Patrick LUO

Source: the Atlantic

December 18, 2022. World Cup Final in Qatar. Argentina vs France. Penalty shootout to decide. 

The Argentines must score this kick to win. Moments later…. The players run towards Montiel, the decisive kicker…..  The French stood with their faces dejected. Outside of the stadium: Argentina in tears of joy, France in tears of bittersweetness; the world in ecstasy.

In total 1.5 billion watched that tournament final on their televisions — that itself is almost 20% of the global population of 8 billion. This snapshot demonstrates that the World Cup Final is more than a game; rather, an experience that takes humanity to unprecedented emotional depths.

Indeed. A tournament final can unite polarised and fractured nations together through collective emotions.For Argentina, the tears of joy unite them in a rare glimpse of joy amidst one of the worst modern economic crises. Inflation had reached 3 digits and many citizens lost hope as their savings were wiped out along with their purchasing power.  Moreover,  Argentina went through periods between democracy and military juntas. The last junta from 1974 to 1983, saw more than 20,000 jailed, tortured, killed or disappeared. Therefore, this victory also reminded Argentines that their country was not just instability but grit and passion, through the player’s hard won victory.

For France, the tears of bittersweetness united them amidst the question of what counts as French, given France has become a much more multiethnic society. The latter was proven the winner as the French players from mostly migrant backgrounds fought until the very last minute of the final.

Liberty in taking initiative even when losing,

Equality in players being selected for merit,

Fraternity in players united in pursuing that one trophy that was so close, yet so far. 

The final itself wasn’t just about national narratives, but individual narratives that prove that football ensures the most deserving talents don’t go to waste.

For example, Messi — the captain of the winning Argentine team in that final — almost stopped practising football completely as his family was unable to pay for his growth hormone deficiency treatments — a condition that stops height growth. Thanks to his talent and relentless drive, a Spanish Club — FC Barcelona — promised to recruit him and pay for the treatment.  

For Mbappe, the French player who scored two goals in that final,he started from the most marginalised outer neighbourhoods of Paris. However, he found the spark with portraits of all time greats, which turned into relentlessness that attracted the French national team’s focus. 

For the host country of the final, Qatar, the development of futuristic stadiums and the improvement of transport systems and of housing have moved it beyond the caricature of a small oil-rich nation, but rather a small oil-rich nation that can host a seismic and global event like the World Cup.

For the Global South, the message from Qatar was “If they can host the world, the world could reshape the view of that host country”.

The next edition of the World Cup Final will take place this summer in 2026. Teams, players and hosts will change, but never the stories of joy, redemption, suffering and pride.

By Gabriele CEPAVICIUTE

The 1994 American comedy-drama film “Forrest Gump”, directed by Robert Zemeckis, tells the story of a man who moves through life by constantly adapting to the world around him. Early in the film, a young Forrest, wearing leg braces and being chased by other children, is urged forward with the now-iconic line: “Run, Forrest, run!” The braces fall off, and this moment is framed as liberation. What follows is a life defined by movement: running through school, into the Vietnam War, and even across the country. For many viewers, this is an inspiring story of perseverance and “overcoming” limitations such as disability through determination. However, this raises an important question: if disability is understood as a “challenge”, is it really the individual who faces it, or is it something society has imposed? 

Disability is often presented as an individual struggle, an obstacle to be overcome, yet much of this “struggle” does not emerge from the body itself, but from the environment in which that body exists. A wheelchair does not prevent movement, but stairs do. Individual learning needs alone do not exclude the student, but rigid education systems do. If disability was purely an individual limitation, there would not be such consistent patterns of exclusion. According to The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), children with disabilities are two to three times more likely to be out of school than their non-disabled peers. Similarly, workplaces that lack basic accomodations—such as flexible schedules, assistive technologies, or accessible infrastucture—create barriers that have little to do with ability or willingness to work. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that around 16% of the global population lives with a disability, yet employment rates for this group remain between 30% to 50%, compared to about 75% for non-disabled individuals. What is framed as a personal limitation is therefore the result of collective decisions about whose needs are prioritized. 

Despite this, the dominant societal response to disability is not change, but emotional reaction. People with disabilities are often met with sympathy or admiration, to the extent that even ordinary actions, such as going to the grocery store independently, are framed as extraordinary. While this may appear as compassionate, it is ultimately passive. It acknowledges difficulty without questioning its cause, allowing observers to feel moral without requiring them to act. In this sense, the expression of “overcoming” plays a crucial role, because to describe disability as a “challenge” suggests that difficulty is inherent, while describing individuals as “overcoming” frames the obstacle as internal rather than structural. In contrast, accessibility demands something less comfortable—it requires redesigning spaces, policies and redistributing resources. In many European cities, historic buildings remain inaccessible due to preservation priorities, highlighting how exclusion is maintained in the name of tradition. Accessibility, however, shifts responsibility from individuals to institutions, where decision-makers often do not experience these barriers themselves. This is why sympathy is more common—it costs nothing. It is far easier to turn to emotions and admire individuals for overcoming obstacles than to remove those obstacles altogether.

Finally, if the problem is structural, then the solutions must be structural as well. Accessibility cannot be treated as a luxury, but must be integrated into society as a natural part of it. This includes designing spaces that are accessible from the start, rather than rebuilding them later, and consulting people with disabilities directly. Research by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) suggests that up to 40% of the population benefits from accessible design at some point in their lives, including elderly individuals, parents with strollers and those with temporary injuries. This challenges the assumption that accessibility is a “special accommodation”, instead of being a public good. The goal is not to make people with disabilities better at adapting to the world, but to create a world that does not require constant adaptation in order to belong.

There is a reason why “Forrest Gump” remains so widely known. Much like its famous line, “Life is like a box of chocolates—you never know what you’re gonna get,” the film presents uncertainty as something to be accepted rather than questioned. It offers comfort, especially to those who are not required to face systemic barriers themselves. It reassures audiences that perseverance is enough, and that individuals can succeed without the world changing. However, this comes at a cost: it shifts attention away from structures that make succeeding inaccessible in the first place. Disability is not a personal failure to overcome, but a reflection of a world that has been built without everyone in mind. And if this world can be constructed, it can also be changed. For this reason the “challenge” is not in the people who have a disability, but the society that creates these barriers.