In The Technological Republic: Hard Power, Soft Belief, and the Future of the West (2025), Alexander C. Karp and Nicholas W. Zamiska present China not only as a technological and commercial rival, but as the central catalyst for a profound moment of reckoning for the West. While the prevailing discourse in Silicon Valley often vacillates between admiration for China’s efficiency and anxiety over U.S. stagnation, Karp and Zamiska use China as a disciplinary force, revealing the West’s complacency, fragmentation, and loss of cultural confidence. Rather than a model to emulate, China serves as a mirror, measuring the West’s decline across three critical dimensions: AI and software competition, industrial and talent mobilization, and civilizational confidence. In this framework, China looms as a stark reminder that delay is dangerous, neutrality is untenable, and cultural evasiveness comes at a high cost.
Silicon Valley’s ‘China Envy’: Rethinking U.S. Innovation in the Age of Technological and Infrastructure Competition
In recent years, Silicon Valley has developed a phenomenon that could be described as “China envy,” particularly among tech entrepreneurs and accelerationists, many of whom align with Trump-era ideologies. This admiration for China stems from the country’s ability to effectively coordinate state and private sector efforts, enabling technological breakthroughs that the more fragmented U.S. system has struggled to replicate. Observers in Silicon Valley note that China has made significant strides in infrastructure development, manufacturing, and AI innovation, while the U.S. lags behind with aging infrastructure, slower project execution, and diminishing manufacturing capacity.
The shift in perception of Chinese firms marks a notable turn. Once regarded as mere imitators, Chinese companies are now seen as exemplars of efficiency and pragmatic execution, particularly in hardware and AI integration. China’s state-guided, results-oriented approach to technological advancement, which emphasizes the application of AI across devices, services, and manufacturing, contrasts sharply with the United States’ focus on more abstract and aspirational objectives, such as artificial general intelligence. This disparity not only highlights American shortcomings in physical infrastructure and manufacturing but also underscores the contrasting strategic mindsets of the two nations.
This “China envy” is not just an expression of admiration but a moment of reckoning for the U.S. As China deepens its commitment to government-backed research and practical AI applications, U.S. tech leaders are beginning to recognize the urgent need to rethink their innovation strategy. Historically, American companies exported technological ideas and cultural models that Chinese firms refined and improved. Today, as China continues to leverage its government’s vast resources to drive tangible results, the U.S. faces the challenge of revitalizing its own technological and physical infrastructure. It must also rethink its approach to AI, moving beyond the pursuit of theoretical concepts to the integration of practical AI solutions into everyday life.
Ultimately, Silicon Valley’s fascination with China highlights both a source of anxiety and an opportunity for the U.S. to reevaluate its technological trajectory. China’s rapid advancements offer valuable lessons on integrating innovation with national strategy. If the U.S. hopes to regain its competitive edge, it must address its own structural weaknesses, recalibrate its goals, and adopt a more results-oriented approach, much like its Chinese counterparts. In this age of fierce global competition, the United States must confront the reality that its technological dominance is no longer a foregone conclusion.
The Decline of Deterrence: How Western Complacency Risks Losing the Software Century to China
The long-standing peace that defined the post-World War II era, often referred to as the “Long Peace,” was primarily maintained through nuclear deterrence. The atomic age, built on the idea of mutually assured destruction and the stable balance of hardware-based military capabilities, ushered in a unique period of geopolitical stability. However, this age of nuclear weapons is quickly giving way to a new era—one driven by software, artificial intelligence (AI), and autonomous systems. As military strategies evolve from hardware-based deterrence to software-dominated warfare, the West’s complacency, combined with China’s relentless pursuit of technological advancement, threatens to reshape global power dynamics.
For decades, the U.S. and its allies maintained a technological and military edge, driven by an unwavering belief in the supremacy of liberal democracy and American-led innovation. This mindset, encapsulated in the “winner’s fallacy,” suggested that democratic ideals and technological dominance were both inevitable and invulnerable. However, this belief has been increasingly challenged by China’s strategic focus on AI and advanced technologies, which are becoming integral to military power. As Western elites continue to cling to outdated notions of technological inevitability, they fail to recognize the urgency of responding to China’s relentless drive. The Western focus on consumer technology and entertainment has left military research—particularly in AI and autonomous systems—seriously underfunded.
This shift toward software-based warfare is already visible in the form of China’s rapid advancement in AI, drone technology, and facial recognition systems. Companies like CloudWalk and research from institutions such as Zhejiang University are advancing autonomous systems at a pace that poses serious strategic risks. The U.S., by contrast, continues to prioritize traditional military systems like the F-35 fighter jet, which may soon be irrelevant in the face of AI-driven warfare. While Silicon Valley’s leaders hesitate to engage in military applications due to ethical concerns, China treats AI development as an essential part of its national security strategy, treating it less as a philosophical exploration and more as a weaponized tool.
The underlying complacency of the West, exacerbated by the belief in the “End of History”—that liberal democracy would remain the ultimate victor—has led to a dangerously misguided strategic outlook. Historical narratives that suggested China’s technological growth would plateau, due to its lack of democracy or because of the failure of Soviet-style central planning, are now proving to be overly simplistic. As China advances its AI and defense capabilities with strategic precision, the U.S. risks losing the initiative. This complacency is not just a matter of misjudging a competitor, but underestimating the speed and seriousness with which China is advancing its military capabilities.
The authors of The Technological Republic warn that the next “Manhattan Project” must focus on AI, as China’s rapid development in this field threatens to outpace the West. Unlike the West, where military innovation is slowed by ethical debates and a lack of prioritization, China continues to push forward without such hindrances. The global balance of power is shifting, and if the West does not recalibrate its technological investments and strategic focus, it risks losing the Software Century to a nation that is both relentless and unburdened by the distractions that plague democratic societies.
The Mobilization Divide: “Technological Agnostics” and the Leviathan
A critical axis of the growing gap between the West and China lies in the realm of industrial and talent mobilization. The authors argue that while the West possesses ample intelligence and capital, it suffers from a profound loss of obligation, coordination, and seriousness in its approach to national priorities. In contrast, China has developed a system that, despite its authoritarian nature, can efficiently marshal engineering talent, capital, and institutional resources toward collective national goals. This stark difference highlights the “hollowing out” of Western seriousness, particularly in Silicon Valley, where elite talent often channels its efforts into non-strategic fields such as food delivery apps, social media, and entertainment.
Karp and Zamiska criticize what they call the Western “technological agnostics”—a term for the mindset that prioritizes market-driven innovation above all else, with little regard for how technology can serve national security needs. This contrasts sharply with China, which, though coercive, successfully aligns its tech giants with national objectives, integrating them into state-driven initiatives. This is not an endorsement of authoritarianism, but rather an acknowledgment that China’s model stands in opposition to the unchecked faith in markets as the sole drivers of innovation. The Chinese approach serves as a proof that market systems, left to their own devices, cannot always deliver what is needed for national survival.
One of the most telling examples of this divide is the reaction to Project Maven, a Pentagon initiative that sought to incorporate AI into defense systems. Google employees protested the project on moral grounds, illustrating the deep ideological divide between the West’s focus on ethical concerns and China’s pragmatic approach to technological mobilization. While Western discourse fixates on questions of AI consciousness and ethical dilemmas, China is focused on leveraging technology for practical, state-centered purposes—what Karp refers to as the “Leviathan.” The Chinese government integrates its national champions directly into defense priorities, allowing for a more unified, strategic application of advanced technology.
The gap in mobilization is not merely institutional; it is also experiential. Karp contrasts the upbringing of contemporary Western elites, who are largely insulated from war and hardship, with leaders like Xi Jinping, who endured the struggles of the Cultural Revolution. This experience imbues Chinese leaders with a “founder mindset”—a deep, visceral understanding that national survival is never guaranteed. In this context, China’s advantage is not simply one of scale or efficiency but of a unified national vision that demands sacrifice, coordination, and a long-term commitment to survival. In the West, by contrast, elite talent remains disconnected from the pressing needs of national security, leading to a dangerous misalignment in priorities at a critical moment in history.
Civilizational Confidence: The Void in the West vs. China’s Thousand-Year View
In The Technological Republic, Karp and Zamiska present China as a formidable challenge not only in terms of technological power but also as a critique of Western civilizational confidence. They argue that while the West has focused heavily on hard power—drones, AI, logistics—this power is hollow without the foundation of shared belief and purpose. According to the authors, a nation’s ability to sustain technological and military supremacy requires more than innovation; it requires a deep sense of national identity, historical continuity, and collective will, elements that China has cultivated in abundance, while the West has allowed to erode.
The core issue, as Karp and Zamiska see it, is that the West has systematically deconstructed its own identity. Universities have abandoned traditional canons, national narratives are often viewed as exclusionary, and elites hesitate to assert ideas about truth, beauty, or excellence. In doing so, the West has created an identity void, one that the market has filled with trivial pursuits. Silicon Valley’s focus on consumer-driven technologies is a reflection of this broader cultural fragmentation, as the West struggles to define its national project. In contrast, China operates with a “thick” conception of national identity, one in which technology is seen not merely as a tool for lifestyle enhancement but as a critical part of its civilizational infrastructure. Leaders like Xi Jinping think in terms of centuries rather than election cycles, reinforcing a long-term view of progress that contrasts sharply with the West’s short-term focus.
This difference in worldview has significant strategic implications. Karp and Zamiska contend that China’s confidence is not based on moral perfection but on a steadfast belief in its mission. This enables China to act decisively without the moral hesitation that often paralyzes the West. In the West, there is an increasing reluctance to take bold action, driven by concerns about ethical implications, cultural diversity, and political correctness. This hesitation has left the West unable to justify collective sacrifice or long-term mobilization in the face of global challenges. As a result, even superior technology becomes brittle without the societal cohesion necessary to support it.
The authors argue that China’s civilizational confidence functions as both a challenge and a provocation to the West. It exposes the West’s discomfort with power, hierarchy, and national ambition. Without a revival of belief in the “National Project,” collective experience, and civic ritual, the West risks both cultural assimilation and technical subordination. As China continues to advance its national project with a clear sense of purpose and identity, the West’s failure to do so may lead to its decline on the global stage. The authors warn that in a world where belief is a strategic asset, the West must find a way to reclaim its confidence or face the consequences of its own cultural fragmentation.
China as Mirror, Not Model: A Reflection of Western Decay
In The Technological Republic, Karp and Zamiska present China not as a model for the West to emulate, but as a mirror reflecting the decay of Western civilization. They make it clear that while China’s model comes with significant costs—surveillance, repression, debt, and coercion—it is the unity and purpose behind China’s approach that provides the most unsettling contrast to the West. China’s ability to align technology, industry, and national purpose is viewed not with admiration, but with diagnostic concern.
The authors argue that Silicon Valley’s “China envy” focuses narrowly on the country’s speed, scale, and execution. This view, according to Karp and Zamiska, misses the bigger picture: China’s success is not merely a product of efficiency but of a deeply ingrained belief in its national project. Where the envy narrative asks, “How can we copy China?”, the authors challenge the West to ask, “Do we still know who we are?” China’s singular vision and unity have allowed it to mobilize its resources effectively for long-term national goals, while the West struggles with fragmentation and ideological paralysis.
China’s role in the book is not as a competitor, but as a pressure point for the West. The authors contend that China’s coherence exposes the West’s fundamental weakness—its detachment from history, national belief, and a sense of collective obligation. Unlike China, which uses its national identity to fuel its technological and industrial growth, the West’s failure to reconnect with its own identity risks making delay in responding to global challenges fatal. Thus, China functions as a mirror for the West: not a model to copy, but a reflection of what happens when a nation loses its sense of purpose and unity.
Final Thoughts: China as a Wake-Up Call for the West
In The Technological Republic, China is not presented as an object of admiration, but as the clock—an undeniable force that transforms abstract debates into existential choices. For Karp and Zamiska, China’s relentless drive makes neutrality untenable, skepticism dangerous, and complacency catastrophic. The urgency they advocate is not about replicating China’s model, but about ensuring the West does not find itself too late, having abandoned belief and with no moral clarity left to guide its actions. Beneath the surface of “China envy” lies a deeper, more troubling realization: the West may no longer believe strongly enough in itself to compete at all. China’s ascendancy serves as a harsh reminder that power, once relinquished, will not wait for the West to find its footing.
References
- The Technological Republic Hard Power, Soft Belief, and the Future of the West. Alexander C. Karp, Nicholas W. Zamiska. 2025
- “Silicon Valley Has China Envy, and That Reveals a Lot About America”. Oct. 22, 2025. Li Yuan. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/22/business/china-tech-silicon-valley.html
- “The Great Reckoning: What the West Should Learn From China”, Kaiser Kuo. October 16, 2025. https://www.theideasletter.org/essay/the-great-reckoning/
- “The Real China Model: Beijing’s Enduring Formula for Wealth and Power”, Dan Wang and Arthur Kroeber. Foreign Affairs. August 19, 2025. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/china/real-china-model-wang-kroeber