Today’s Focus: More Pessimistic than Epidemic Prevention Measures! Why Are Chinese Rich People Disappointed Collectively? Too Many Differences Make Consensus Difficult, Conclusion of the Cold Scene at the EU-China Summit; Collective Anti-Communism Fury Sweeps Across Taiwan.
According to the latest report released by the internationally renowned consulting firm Oliver Wyman, 22% of the high-income population in China holds a pessimistic outlook on the future economy. This proportion is even higher than during the peak of the strictest lockdown measures in 2022 amidst the COVID-19 pandemic.
The survey targeted high-income households with a monthly income exceeding 30,000 RMB. The results showed that the age group of 18 to 28 experienced the largest decrease in their emotional state.
Imke Wouters, a partner at Oliver Wyman, pointed out that this pessimistic sentiment is not temporary but rather a “change in mindset.” Simply put, the wealthy are afraid to consume, invest, or believe in the future. This mindset will significantly impact “China’s economic growth.”
In response, the blogger “In the Wilderness,” who has over 100,000 followers, commented that this report indicates that even the middle and upper class with annual incomes of hundreds of thousands and significant assets have collectively lost confidence. Their pessimistic views on the Chinese economy even surpass the peak of the epidemic lockdown in 2022, indicating that China’s economy has quietly collapsed.
“In the Wilderness” stated, “The rich no longer consume, do not dare to invest, and do not believe in the future,” which is most terrifying for the Chinese economy. The true crisis of a society is not economic recession but rather the loss of hope.
The report from Oliver Wyman indicates that the wealthy are no longer enthusiastic about buying luxury goods but rather seek more comfort, such as going on vacations. They believe that “it’s better to fly to Japan than buy a bag, to soak in hot springs in Malaysia than buy a car, at least breathing some free air.”
The report shows that unlike before, now wealthy individuals prefer to travel to closer countries like Japan and Malaysia rather than developed countries in Europe and America. Travel to countries like Japan and Malaysia in Asia has already returned to pre-epidemic levels.
“In the Wilderness” pointed out that the declining willingness of young wealthy people to go to Europe and America is due to two main reasons: stringent visa restrictions and concerns about asset security. Especially since 2024, the Chinese Communist Party has intensified tax investigations on overseas income, targeting high net worth individuals, prompting many wealthy individuals to not only “leave with their persons” but also with their “money,” and even starting to research obtaining a third-country passport to change their identity. This is an “upgrade of the wealthy’s draining strategy” far beyond a simple shift in consumption, essentially a strategy of capital and talent migration.
“In the Wilderness” also mentioned that while the wealthy are busy “draining,” the young generation in China, especially post-2000s, is experiencing a “more miserable generation than the previous one” cruel reality. They were born during the “economic takeoff” period and were instilled with the concept of “striving to change one’s fate.” However, upon entering society, they found that they don’t even have a chance to strive.
“In the Wilderness” stated, “The entire society is now filled with a sense of unease, and even the supposed most optimistic young wealthy individuals have lost hope. In this situation, who can this country rely on for the future? It should be noted that true despair is when you don’t even deserve to be angry, only able to retreat in silence. Currently, China is in the midst of this ‘silent ebb,’ beneath its calm surface lies enormous pressure for change.”
On July 24th, the EU-China Summit was held in Beijing. Although this year marks the 50th anniversary of diplomatic relations between the EU and China, due to recent tensions in EU-China relations, the atmosphere of the meeting was quite subdued. After the talks, the EU and China only issued a joint statement on climate issues. Experts pointed out that significant breakthroughs in EU-China relations are unlikely, and releasing a cooperative statement on climate issues was merely to save face for both parties.
At this summit, President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen and President of the European Council Charles Michel met with Chinese Premier Li Keqiang, with Chinese leader Xi Jinping absent.
Von der Leyen stated at the summit that EU-China trade “requires more balance,” and China should open up more markets to European businesses.
In response, Li Keqiang mentioned that Beijing and the EU do not have fundamental conflicting interests. Beijing agrees to expand cooperation in trade, investment, and green technology and is willing to resolve differences through negotiation.
Su Ziyun, director of the Institute of Strategy and Resources at the Taiwan Institute of National Defense Security, told Dajiyuan that Europe hopes for China to open its markets to reduce EU’s dependence on the US market. However, China has nearly a $300 billion surplus with the US and a $360 billion surplus with the EU. If Beijing truly opens its market to European businesses, it will lose part of these surpluses, further impacting China’s economy. He believes that Beijing’s promise to open the market remains to be seen.
Yi Yaoyuan, professor of international studies at the University of St. Thomas in the United States, told Dajiyuan that what the EU urgently wants to resolve is China’s coercion over the European market. This is the biggest point of contention in EU-China trade.
Apart from trade, another major conflict between the EU and China is the Russia-Ukraine war. Von der Leyen stated after the summit that Beijing should leverage its influence over Russia to push for negotiations between Russia and Ukraine. Michel expressed that the EU demands China to pay attention to its exports to Russia and to not export products that could potentially be used for military purposes to Russia.
Michel’s comments refer to China’s assistance to Russia. Reuters reported evidence showing that to evade Western sanctions, Chinese-manufactured “drone engines” under the guise of “industrial cooling equipment” are being covertly sent to Russia. This behavior by China has greatly unsettled the EU.
Cheng Qinmo, associate professor of diplomacy at Tamkang University in Taiwan, told Dajiyuan that Ukraine has discovered that 60% of Russian drones contain components from China. In addition, in the recent 18th round of sanctions against Russia by the EU, two Chinese banks and five Chinese enterprises were included. Based on these factors alone, it is unlikely for EU-China relations to make substantial progress.
Yi Yaoyuan stated that as long as China continues to support Russia, it is impossible to improve relations with the EU. The EU is concerned that if Russia wins the war, it will pose a security threat to European countries.
Moreover, China began restricting rare earth exports from April this year, causing European automobile production lines to temporarily shut down. Although in June, China’s exports of rare earth to the EU saw a slight increase, trust between the two parties has been severely impacted.
Cheng Qinmo pointed out that China’s actions are aimed at pressuring the EU through rare earth exports to force concessions. However, Europe has recognized China’s brutal authoritarian system and its disruption to the global order. He emphasized, “Currently, in terms of geopolitics, economy, trade, and even rare earth control, and human rights, the knot between EU-China relations is very difficult to untie.”
Su Ziyun said that the differences between the EU and China are too great, so both parties could only release a statement on a climate-related issue. This is because climate issues are not as sensitive, making it a topic where both parties can easily find common ground. For Beijing, doing so can at least maintain its international image of “willing to cooperate” and also aligns with China’s current goal of reducing internal dependency on oil and natural gas.
In other words, aside from this symbolic consensus, the EU and China are essentially “speaking different languages” on other issues, making it difficult to achieve breakthroughs.
Taiwan’s major recall movement is now in the countdown phase, with the first batch of voting scheduled for July 26, covering 24 Kuomintang legislators and one county mayor. This vote may change the political landscape of Taiwan’s legislature from being pro-KMT to diversified, and could even affect the 2026 local elections.
On July 23, former Chairman of Lien Hwa Electronics and founder of the Anti-Communist Alliance for Taiwan Protection, Cao Xingcheng, posted on Facebook explaining the reasons for initiating the major recall movement in Taiwan. He said, “Because the legislature has now become a dictatorship’s battle chamber. Bills are put to a vote without prior notice to other legislators, and they are passed forcibly. If the Democratic Progressive Party disagrees, they are severely beaten.” “Laws passed in this manner lack ‘procedural justice,’ causing the rule of law to be compromised, leading Taiwan into chaos. We can reasonably suspect that this is exactly what the CCP wants – to create chaos in Taiwan before attacking it.”
Cao Xingcheng questioned whether the 16 KMT legislators, who shortly after taking office in April 2024 met with Wang Huning, a member of the CCP’s Politburo Standing Committee, in Beijing, were attempting to “collude with the CCP” to disrupt Taiwan’s democratic system. He said, “This covert behavior has lost the trust of the people, hence facing a recall.” Other reasons for recall include the lack of fairness. Legislators fail to study bills properly, engage in fights and name-calling every day, and spend a significant amount of taxpayer money each year. Therefore, they deserve to be recalled.
Yuzongji, former dean of the National Defense University’s Warfare Academy and participant in the civic recall movement, estimated that this recall movement is likely to succeed in at least 10 seats, especially highlighting Hualien as the most representative battleground. He said, “The incumbent legislator in Hualien has monopolized local resources for 23 years. This time, prominent figures from Taiwan’s business community, such as former chairman of Wellcome Xu Zhongren and chairman of Pegatron Tong Zixian, publicly expressed support for the recall, along with many retired teachers and principals, making the situation optimistic.”
Yuzongji emphasized in an interview with Dajiyuan, “Hualien is like the center of operations, and once this fortress is captured, it symbolizes the success of the major recall.”
The recall movement is in full swing, and the CCP is highly displeased, trying all means to intervene in the recall. According to the Taiwan research institution IORG’s analysis, in the first half of 2025, official CCP media and its affiliated social media accounts published approximately 425 articles and videos labeling the recall movement as ‘green terror’ and ‘dictatorship.’ The Taiwan Affairs Office even urged the public not to recall KMT legislators, triggering a backlash in Taiwanese society.
In response, Cao Xingcheng said in an interview with Dajiyuan, “The Chinese Communist Party is accustomed to oppressing the Chinese people and even wants to bully the Taiwanese people from across the sea, which is simply embarrassing.”
Wang Zhisheng believes that Taiwan’s democracy has undergone many political battles, and the CCP often says more than it does, leading to many mistakes. Beijing’s intervention this time has been “superficial restraint but deep infiltration.” While traditionally not resorting to traditional means of interference, such as encouraging Taiwanese businesspeople to return to Taiwan, they are conducting an information campaign through media manipulation and social media propaganda, combined with pro-Blue camp narratives. He warned that the CCP may continue this operating mode during Taiwan’s 2026 and 2028 elections, posing a greater threat to democracy.
The major feature of this major recall movement is the convergence of different political ideologies. Traditionally, the anti-China faction and the anti-Communist Chinese Nationalist Party faction have differences regarding the ROC system. However, in the face of a common enemy, the CCP, they have chosen to postpone historical disputes and rally under the anti-Communist banner.
Momo from Taipei’s Recall Promotion Group is a working professional. She said, “No matter what political party you are in Taiwan, whether in power or in the opposition, it is actually worth support from us, the people. What we reject is the invasion of China’s red influence.”
Another characteristic of the major recall is the rise of the grassroots movement. Most participants in this recall movement lack political experience. They come from various professions, including textile workers, marketing specialists in technology companies, teachers, young mothers, mostly ordinary working people who have never participated in a social movement before.
Momo stated: “We are not seeking office; it is just that this is something we believe should be done. Whether the major recall succeeds or fails, I still have to return to my original life.” She emphasized that this is a grassroots movement where volunteers have no demands and therefore no fear.
—
Source: Translated and Rewritten from Dajiyuan’s report.