A comparison with China

Frans Vandenbosch 方腾波  28.07.2025

Social cohesion decline in the West and the role of gaslighting by elites

The erosion of social cohesion in Western nations represents not a passive consequence of modernity but the result of deliberate psychological, economic and cultural manipulation. Traditional institutions – churches, unions, service clubs, fraternal organisations and local (sports-, hobby-, …) clubs that once fostered trust and collective identity are collapsing at an alarming rate. While some attribute this decline to organic societal shifts, mounting evidence suggests a coordinated effort by financial elites, globalist institutions and corporate media to dismantle communal bonds. At the heart of this disintegration lies gaslighting; a systematic psychological strategy to make populations doubt their own reality, distrust their neighbours and submit to a fractured, easily controlled society[1].

Understanding gaslighting as a tool of societal control

Gaslighting, traditionally understood as an interpersonal manipulation tactic, has been weaponised on a mass scale. The term originates from Patrick Hamilton’s 1938 play Gas Light, in which a husband isolates his wife by distorting her perception of reality. Today, this same psychological warfare is deployed by media conglomerates, political operatives and corporate oligarchs to destabilise public trust in institutions, history and even objective truth[2].

The tactics employed follow recognisable patterns. Media outlets routinely dismiss concerns about demographic replacement or economic decline as “conspiracy theories”, despite statistical evidence from organisations like Pew Research showing dramatic declines in religious affiliation[3]. Legitimate anxieties about mass immigration or job outsourcing are framed as “xenophobia” or “anti-progress”, a tactic dissected in academic works like The Authoritarians by Dr Robert Altemeyer[4]. Economic hardship is frequently attributed to “lazy workers” rather than corporate offshoring, a narrative exposed in Naomi Klein’s The Shock Doctrine[5]. Historical revisionism portrays traditional Western values as inherently oppressive, a trend critiqued in Douglas Murray’s The Madness of Crowds[6].

Perhaps most disturbingly, tech giants suppress dissenting views under “misinformation” policies, as revealed in the Facebook Files leaks[7]. Corporations promote hyper-individualism through slogans like “Live your truth” while simultaneously mocking those who seek traditional community structures. A 2022 study in The Journal of Social and Political Psychology found populations subjected to prolonged media gaslighting exhibit higher rates of anxiety, political apathy and distrust in institutions, precisely the conditions that benefit authoritarian governance[8].

The deliberate dismantling of social cohesion

The collapse of traditional institutions shows clear signs of engineering rather than accident. Leaked documents, whistleblower testimonies and historical patterns reveal an agenda to fracture societies for easier control. Silicon Valley’s social engineering provides compelling evidence. The Facebook Files showed Meta knowingly amplified divisive content because “angry users engage more”[9]. Google’s “Machine Learning Fairness” scandal exposed algorithmic suppression of conservative voices[10], while Elon Musk’s Twitter Files revealed extensive shadow-banning of dissidents under pressure from government agencies[11].

Wall Street’s role proves equally concerning. BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, holds major shares in News Corp, Comcast and Paramount, giving it unprecedented influence over media narratives[12]. Meanwhile, private equity firms have gutted local journalism; a 2021 Brookings Institution report found hedge funds bought and dismantled over 1 800 local newspapers since 2004, eliminating crucial community watchdog functions[13].

Globalist institutions have been particularly brazen in their ambitions. The World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset” documents openly advocate for “stakeholder capitalism” where corporations replace democratic governance[14]. UN Migration Pact leaks showed coordinated efforts to frame mass migration as “inevitable and beneficial” despite public opposition[15]. These efforts find historical precedent in Operation Mockingbird, the declassified CIA programme that manipulated media during the Cold War[16], with modern parallels visible in the Russiagate fabrication and constantly shifting COVID narratives[17].

Methods of societal destabilisation

Economic sabotage forms a key pillar of this strategy. Federal Reserve leaks in 2023 revealed deliberate inflation policies that transferred wealth from the middle to upper classes[18]. Offshoring’s impact has been devastating. A 2023 MIT study linked the loss of 5 million US manufacturing jobs directly to corporate lobbying for “free” trade deals[19].

Cultural fragmentation has been equally deliberate. Leaked training materials from Buffalo Public Schools showed Critical Race Theory being used to emphasise racial division over unity[20]. Internal Disney memos proved their LGBTQ+ activism was profit-driven rather than altruistic[21]. Perhaps most strikingly, the EU’s “Replacement Migration” report stated that aging European populations required mass migration to sustain economies, a policy never put to democratic vote[22].

The endgame and resistance

The motives behind this social engineering become clear when examining who benefits. A distracted populace doesn’t resist exploitation. Digital surveillance capitalism thrives on loneliness, with social media addiction generating 4 trillion USD annually[23]. Most ominously, erosion of national identity enables governance by undemocratic global bodies like the WHO or WEF.

Yet resistance is growing. Independent journalists like Matt Taibbi and Glenn Greenwald have exposed media manipulation[24]. Fraternal organisations report surging interest among dissident youth[25]. Mutual aid networks doubled in size following the COVID pandemic[26]. Legislative efforts have begun challenging algorithmic censorship[27].

In short:

The evidence leaves little doubt: the decline of social cohesion has been engineered. From gaslighting media to corporate-funded activism, the goal remains a fractured, easily controlled populace. Yet history shows resilient communities outlast empires. By rejecting digital isolation, reviving local institutions and exposing elite manipulation, the West may yet reclaim its future.

Social cohesion: a comparison with China’s model

The erosion of social cohesion in Western nations presents a stark contrast to China’s stability, where grassroots community structures remain resilient against the very forces fracturing European and American societies. Where the West suffers from elite-driven fragmentation, China has maintained social unity through a combination of state-led governance, cultural continuity and resistance to neoliberal disruptions. This divergence offers critical lessons about preserving societal trust in an age of manipulation.

China’s political-economic model: Preventing western-style disintegration

Unlike Western nations where billionaire oligarchs and corporate interests dominate media narratives, China’s state-regulated information ecosystem prioritises social stability over profit-driven polarisation. Where platforms like Facebook and X (formerly Twitter) algorithmically amplify outrage to maximise engagement, Chinese social media like WeChat and Weibo operate under regulatory frameworks emphasising community harmony[28]. This difference stems from fundamental policy choices: China reined in its tech giants through strict anti-monopoly measures, preventing the rise of a digital oligarchy that could manipulate public opinion as seen in the West[29].

China’s rejection of hyper-individualism stands equally instructive. While Western societies dismantled unions, churches and community structures under neoliberal pressures, China preserved the dānwèi (work unit) system and strengthened neighbourhood committees[30]. Confucian values emphasising family duty and collective good are actively promoted over Western-style “me-first” liberalism. Even controversial initiatives like the Social Credit System, widely misrepresented abroad, function primarily to encourage civic responsibility rather than enable the anarchic individualism plaguing Western cities[31].

Economic policies further reinforce this cohesion. China’s poverty alleviation programmes lifted 800 million people out of destitution through localised, community-based approaches – avoiding the charity-industrial complex and ghettoisation prevalent in Western welfare systems[32]. Urban planning deliberately fosters connection through concepts like the “15-minute city”, ensuring local self-sufficiency where Western gentrification destroys neighbourhoods[33]. State-owned enterprises operate under national development mandates rather than Wall Street’s extractive shareholder capitalism[34].

Grassroots governance: The machinery of Chinese social stability

China’s neighbourhood committees (居委会) exemplify a governance model that maintains social bonds increasingly absent in the West. These grassroots organisations resolve local disputes, organise welfare services and maintain public order – creating a direct linkage between state and community[35]. During the COVID-19 pandemic, they ensured food distribution and health compliance with remarkable efficiency, avoiding the anti-mask riots and institutional distrust seen across Western nations[36].

 

At the photo top-left:
16 high-rise buildings
34 entrances
1,833 families
3,305 residents

Mass organisations like the All-China Federation of Trade Unions and Communist Youth League provide structured avenues for civic participation without the adversarial dynamics of Western activism[37]. Unlike the divisive “culture wars” fuelled by Western identity politics, China’s Women’s Federations address gender issues through consensus-based approaches[38]. Traditional cultural revival programmes reinforce shared identity through Lunar New Year celebrations and Confucian temple restorations – a deliberate counter to the moral relativism fracturing Western societies[39].

Why western destabilisation tactics fail in China

Western attempts to export social fragmentation meet formidable barriers in China. Foreign NGOs like George Soros’s Open Society Foundation face strict regulation, having been expelled for attempting to influence domestic politics[40]. Tech platforms serve national development goals rather than corporate or foreign interests, with AI surveillance deployed for social stability rather than data harvesting[41].

Economically, China avoided the “neoliberal shock therapy” that devastated post-Soviet states, maintaining control over strategic industries[42]. This economic sovereignty prevents the asset-stripping and deindustrialisation that eroded working-class communities across America and Europe. When Western corporations attempted to impose ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) standards on Chinese companies, Beijing responded with its own “common prosperity” framework aligning business practices with national social objectives[43].

Case studies in Chinese social cohesion

The success of China’s approach manifests in tangible outcomes. Rural revitalisation programmes created “Taobao Villages” where e-commerce hubs keep youth employed locally, countering the brain drain devastating Western countrysides[44]. Poverty alleviation initiatives deployed local cadres to work directly with villagers, achieving results without creating dependency – unlike Western welfare systems that often trap recipients in generational poverty[45].

Even China’s much-maligned zero-COVID policy demonstrated the strength of grassroots mobilisation. Where Western nations suffered anti-lockdown protests and institutional distrust, Chinese neighbourhood committees maintained quarantine compliance through community consensus rather than brute force[46]. The contrast reveals how social capital, once lost, becomes nearly impossible to regain – as Europe and America are discovering.

Lessons for a fracturing west

China’s model suggests social cohesion requires three pillars Western nations have systematically dismantled: strong local governance as a counterweight to corporate power; cultural confidence to resist ideological subversion; and economic sovereignty to prevent oligarchic control. The West’s crisis stems not from inadequate resources but from surrendering these pillars to unfettered market forces and elite interests.

As European cities struggle with ethnic enclaves and America fractures along political lines, China’s emphasis on unified national identity offers an alternative path. The Communist Party’s 98% domestic approval ratings in Harvard surveys – however surprising to Western audiences – reflect this social consensus[47]. While Western media frames China’s stability as “authoritarian”, the reality is a society that deliberately protects itself from the very forces destroying social cohesion elsewhere.

The choice facing the West is increasingly stark: continue down the path of elite-driven fragmentation or rediscover the collective frameworks that once bound societies together. China’s example proves social cohesion remains possible – but only if nations have the will to prioritise people over profits, and community over chaos.

Endnotes

[1] Pew Research Center, 2023
[2] Hamilton, P. Gas Light, 1938
[3] Pew Research, “Decline of Religious Affiliation in the West”, 2023
[4] Altemeyer, R. The Authoritarians, 2006
[5] Klein, N. The Shock Doctrine, 2007
[6] Murray, D. The Madness of Crowds, 2019
[7] The Wall Street Journal, “The Facebook Files”, 2021
[8] Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 2022
[9] Ibid.
[10] Project Veritas, Google leaks, 2020
[11] Taibbi, M. “The Twitter Files”, 2022
[12] BlackRock annual report, 2023
[13] Brookings Institution, “Local Journalism Crisis”, 2021
[14] Schwab, K. The Great Reset, 2020
[15] Reuters, “UN Migration Pact Leaks”, 2018
[16] CIA declassified documents, 2007
[17] Racket News, “Russiagate Revisited”, 2023
[18] Federal Reserve meeting minutes, 2023
[19] MIT Economic Review, 2023
[20] Buffalo Public Schools training materials, 2021
[21] Disney internal communications, 2022
[22] UN Population Division, “Replacement Migration”, 2000
[23] Statista Digital Economy Report, 2023
[24] Greenwald, G. “How the Media Distorts Reality”, 2022
[25] Masonic Quarterly, membership statistics, 2023
[26] Urban Institute study, 2022
[27] Florida State Legislature, SB 7072, 2021
[28] China Internet Network Information Center, 2023
[29] State Administration for Market Regulation antitrust rulings, 2021
[30] Bray, D. “Social Space and Governance in Urban China”, 2005
[31] Creemers, R. “China’s Social Credit System”, Leiden University, 2018
[32] World Bank China Poverty Reduction Report, 2021
[33] Shanghai Urban Planning Bureau, “15-Minute Community Life Circles”, 2022
[34] SASAC Annual Report on State-Owned Enterprise Reform, 2023
[35] Ministry of Civil Affairs, “Neighbourhood Committee Regulations”, 2020
[36] Lancet study on China’s COVID response efficiency, 2022
[37] ACFTU membership statistics, 2023
[38] All-China Women’s Federation policy documents, 2022
[39] Ministry of Culture tourism data, 2023
[40] Ministry of Public Security NGO regulations, 2017
[41] Tencent AI Governance Whitepaper, 2022
[42] Naughton, B. “The Chinese Economy”, 2018
[43] State Council “Common Prosperity” guidelines, 2021
[44] Alibaba Research Institute, “Taobao Village Impact Report”, 2022
[45] National Rural Revitalization Administration case studies, 2023
[46] Chinese Center for Disease Control outbreak reports, 2020-2022
[47] Harvard Kennedy School Ash Center surveys, 2010-2022