- Why Activists Criticize the West but Don’t Call Out China - April 24, 2025
- Top 15 Natural Phenomena Now Linked to Climate Change - April 21, 2025
- Satellite Captures More Ground Shifts Across Turkey - April 18, 2025
Visible Double Standards in Global Activism
One of the most striking aspects of modern activism is how some activists are vocal about Western governments’ failures but remain noticeably silent about China’s actions. For example, climate change protests frequently target Western oil companies and governments, with huge demonstrations in cities like London, New York, and Berlin. Yet, China, the world’s largest emitter of CO2, rarely features as the main target in these rallies. According to the Global Carbon Atlas, China was responsible for about 30% of global carbon emissions in 2023, more than the United States and the European Union combined. This discrepancy raises questions about why criticism is focused so heavily on the West when China’s environmental footprint is so significant. The contrast is even more glaring given that Western countries are already implementing strict environmental regulations, while China continues to build coal-fired power plants at a rapid pace.
Economic Ties and Fear of Retaliation
Many activists and organizations are cautious about criticizing China because of its economic might and willingness to retaliate. China is the world’s second-largest economy, and its government has a record of punishing companies and groups that speak out against it. For instance, when the NBA’s Houston Rockets manager tweeted support for Hong Kong protesters in 2019, China’s state TV pulled NBA games from its schedule, costing the league hundreds of millions of dollars. Similarly, global brands like H&M and Nike faced boycotts and lost market access after expressing concerns about forced labor in Xinjiang. This atmosphere of economic risk dampens open criticism from activists who may fear financial or legal consequences.
The Western Focus of Activist Networks
A large number of international activist organizations are headquartered in the United States or Europe. Their staff, donors, and audiences are predominantly Western, so their campaigns naturally target Western governments and corporations. For example, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, two of the world’s largest human rights organizations, are based in London and New York. Their reports on Western countries are often picked up by local media and can directly influence policy changes. In contrast, efforts to hold China accountable are less likely to gain traction among their primary supporters, making Western issues more practical targets for their advocacy.
Government Censorship and Lack of Access
China’s strict censorship laws and surveillance make it extremely difficult for activists to operate inside the country. Foreign journalists and NGOs have been expelled or denied visas, and Chinese citizens who speak out face arrest, harassment, or worse. According to Reporters Without Borders, China ranks near the bottom of the World Press Freedom Index year after year. In 2023, China was ranked 179th out of 180 countries for press freedom. This lack of access stifles information and makes it challenging for activists to document abuses or mobilize support. As a result, there are far fewer high-profile campaigns about China’s actions compared to those about Western countries, where transparency and free speech are more protected.
Concerns Over Racism and Sinophobia
Some activists avoid criticizing China out of concern that their words might be interpreted as racist or Sinophobic. With the rise in anti-Asian hate crimes in Western countries since the COVID-19 pandemic began, many advocacy groups are careful to avoid fueling negative stereotypes about Chinese people. This sensitivity can sometimes create a chilling effect, discouraging open discussion about China’s human rights record or foreign policies. Activists may fear that any criticism could be twisted into an attack on Asian communities, so they focus their messaging on Western issues, which are less likely to be misunderstood in this way.
China’s Global Influence on Media Narratives
China has invested heavily in shaping its image abroad through state media, cultural exchanges, and partnerships with foreign journalists and influencers. Outlets like CGTN and Xinhua reach millions outside China, offering a carefully curated view of Chinese policies and society. Chinese embassies and diplomats are also active on social media, pushing back against criticism and promoting Chinese achievements. These efforts can muddy the waters and make it harder for activists to break through with stories about abuses or violations within China. Additionally, local media in developing countries sometimes rely on Chinese funding, which can influence the stories they publish and further limit the reach of critical activist messaging.
Different Legal and Political Consequences
Activists in the West often benefit from legal protections like freedom of speech and the right to assemble. These rights are enshrined in Western constitutions and laws, allowing protesters to criticize their own governments without fear of harsh punishment. In contrast, anyone in China who organizes a protest or calls out the government risks arrest, detention, or even disappearance. According to the Human Rights Watch World Report 2024, thousands of people in China are detained every year for dissent or activism. This stark difference in consequences means that Western activists can be much more vocal about their own governments, while criticizing China from abroad carries personal and organizational risks.
Selective Media Coverage
Western media outlets often focus on stories that resonate with their audiences, which means Western political scandals, police violence, or environmental disasters get much more coverage than similar events in China. This creates a feedback loop: activists focus on what is being reported, and the media covers what activists highlight. For example, protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline in the United States received extensive global coverage, while ongoing environmental protests and crackdowns in China rarely make international headlines. This imbalance in reporting shapes public perception and ensures that Western issues dominate the activist agenda.
Complexity and Scale of Chinese Issues
Many of China’s most serious problems, such as the suppression of Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang or the crackdown on democracy in Hong Kong, are deeply complex and not easily understood by the general public. There is often a lack of clear, accessible information, and Chinese authorities work hard to control the narrative. According to United Nations reports, over one million Uyghurs have been detained in Xinjiang camps, but verifying information is extremely difficult due to government restrictions. Activists may find it easier to focus on familiar Western issues where the facts are clear and the audience can easily grasp the stakes, rather than tackling the opaque and intimidating situation in China.
Geopolitical Realities and Priorities
Finally, activists sometimes prioritize domestic issues because they believe they can make a bigger impact closer to home. Western governments are more likely to be responsive to protests and campaigns, while China’s authoritarian system is known for ignoring or crushing dissent. Additionally, there is a belief among some activists that Western countries should “lead by example” and fix their own problems first before pointing fingers overseas. This approach can inadvertently let China off the hook, even as its global influence grows and its policies have far-reaching consequences for the entire world.
