Almost exactly five years ago to the day, my book Future Angst was published—the book that also gave this blog its name. The book’s subtitle, How We Went from Being Innovation Pioneers to Innovation Laggards and How We Can Overcome “German Angst”, reveals exactly what topic it explores.
My motivation for writing this book was my attempt to understand how a cultural and linguistic region—the DACH region—that 100 to 150 years ago not only produced so many technology companies but was also a leader in medicine, chemistry, pharmaceuticals, science, literature, architecture, and art, yet five generations later is known to the world primarily as a region of ditherers, skeptics, and complainers.
It seems paradoxical that this skepticism about the future often comes from people who develop technologies and want to sell them to others, yet at the same time fear the technologies developed by others. Yet this skepticism—and the unwillingness to engage seriously with others’ technologies, rather than merely with arrogance or condescension—distances us from the expectations of today’s potential users and customers.
An example that painfully highlights this creeping disconnect from the future and the markets comes from an auto show in China. Starting at the 2:15 mark, this young Chinese woman responds to the question, “Would you also buy a German brand?” with a smile and the words, “I don’t think I would. That’s more for my father’s generation.”
Yet China knows from its own painful experience what it means to miss out on the future. For over five millennia, the Middle Kingdom was one of the most advanced countries on earth. In his work Science and Civilization in China, Joseph Needham, a British biologist and sinologist, systematically listed the thousands of inventions originating in China—many of which the West had no idea came from China, such as paper, gunpowder, the magnetic compass, ice cream, toilet paper, banknotes, the chest of drawers, and the toothbrush.
But then the empire stagnated, isolating itself under the Qing Dynasty, and the emperor’s courtiers became convinced that the world—which they viewed merely as vassals of the Chinese empire—could teach them nothing and possessed no goods or commodities that China did not already know and could not produce better.
During a frequently cited special mission in 1792, Lord George Macartney, acting on behalf of the British Crown, arrived in China aboard a 64-gun warship to establish trade and diplomatic relations with the country; yet he could not fail to notice the disrespect shown toward him. He himself represented a country with eight million subjects that was developing rapidly, a trading system that was to span the entire globe, and which had recently become convinced of its status as the most powerful nation on earth. China in the Qing era, by contrast, was a country with 350 million inhabitants—more than the entire population of Europe—and at once the largest, richest, and most populous contiguous political entity in the world.
Macartney’s mission was to end in failure. In a letter to the King of England, the Chinese emperor made it unmistakably clear that the world outside the Empire had nothing to offer and that China itself dealt with the “barbarians” only out of goodwill and great kindness:
… This has been the practice for many years, even though our Celestial Kingdom possesses all things in abundant abundance and lacks no product within its own borders. There was therefore no need to import goods from barbarians from outside in exchange for our own products. But since tea, silk, and porcelain—which the Celestial Empire produces—are absolutely essential to the European nations and to you yourselves, we grant, as a sign of favor, that foreign merchants may settle in Canton, so that your country may benefit from our goodwill.
Half a century later, during the First Opium War from 1839 to 1842, the British defeated the Chinese—ironically, thanks to the further development and improvement of Chinese inventions—and forced them to accept humiliating terms of surrender. China had gone from being a technologically advanced power to a backward and poor country that others freely exploited, and its people suffered for nearly two hundred years.
In a LinkedIn post, Frankfurt-based financial manager Stefan Hoops described his experiences from a recent visit to China. He begins the post with the following sentence:
10 generations suffered because one generation missed the Industrial Revolution.
This sentence perfectly captures China’s sentiment and motivation. For millennia, China saw itself as the center of human civilization, and its decline was sudden and humiliating. For nearly two centuries and across nearly 10 generations, it lay in ruins, had become a pawn of other powers, and was treated as backward, uncivilized, and culturally insignificant.
This humiliation explains the drive of the Chinese government and society to leave this dark period behind and reclaim its rightful place among the world’s leading powers. And this is evident in the astonishing rise and technological catch-up that China has undertaken over the past four decades.
Yet the warning for Germany and Europe cannot be overlooked: Are we, as a generation, on the verge of being the ones who made decisions that will cause the next 10 generations to suffer? Are we currently experiencing our own version of the Opium War—one rooted in our arrogance and hubris—that will cause us to lose our leading positions in mechanical engineering, science, and technology? Stefan Hopps offers another quote that shows us what societal efforts are needed to remain at the forefront. This quote revolves around what is arguably the most significant technological invention in human history: artificial intelligence:
In Europe, nobody cares about AI. In US, three cities care. In China, everyone cares.
Or:
In AI models, we are neck-to-neck against the US. In applied AI, our competitors are Japan, Korea and Germany. While we are already operating dark factories and have machines build machines…where do you stand in Germany?
Or:
If there is no transformation pain in a country, they are not transforming fast enough. That just shifts the pain to future generations.
Or finally:
True, our companies copied Western companies in the past. And your complaints about state subsidies may have merits. However, at this stage, Chinese companies are cutting edge in many industries, and all you do is look at the past, or cry foul. Wake up, this is a race!
What about Germany and Europe? Are we the one generation that has made a single, fateful mistake—or a series of them—that will cause the next ten generations to suffer?
