The state took away the fever medicine so it could find the people with fevers.
In one of his annual letters on China, Dan Wang wrote: As best as I can tell, China is the only country that followed a twisted logic to deny people fever medications during a fever-producing pandemic.
The logic is worth following, because it was not random cruelty. Fever medicine let people manage illness privately at home, out of the state’s sight. Withholding it pushed symptomatic people back into the testing and quarantine machine, where the state could see them. The goal was legibility. A certain kind of bureaucratic mind can explain every step, and the result was still insane.
How does a state as capable as China’s end up there? The common Western answers are that China is doomed or triumphant, capitalist or socialist, a dystopia or a miracle. None of them explains the fever medicine. A better frame is that China is a high-capacity state trying to solve real problems with tools so forceful that the solutions often become the next crisis.
Right diagnosis, wrong dose
Many of Beijing’s diagnoses are not stupid. Housing developers really did take on too much debt. Big tech really did accumulate too much social power. Official corruption really did hollow out state legitimacy. Online education really was preying on anxious parents and immiserating children. And zero-Covid really did buy time before the virus became harder to contain.
The trouble starts after the diagnosis. Beijing sees a real disorder and reaches for the hammer of state capacity. Developers are disciplined so aggressively that confidence in housing collapses. Entrepreneurs are warned so publicly that private sentiment freezes. Bureaucrats are terrorized into clean hands and dead legs. And fever medication is withheld because the quarantine logic needs symptomatic people to enter the control system. Approval ecology describes the mechanism underneath: the state is brilliant when the signal it rewards tracks reality, and dangerous when the signal becomes the reality everyone must perform for.
Zero-Covid shows the whole arc. The state spent years proving it could mobilize the population, censor dissent, track movement and suppress outbreaks, and then the policy became a machine that had to be obeyed after its original logic had expired. When the turn finally came, propaganda moved almost overnight from “the virus must be stomped out” to “health outcomes are ultimately the responsibility of the individual.” The same experts who had said abandoning controls would be irresponsible were wheeled out to reassure people that the virus was not so deadly. The party-state increasingly resembles a crew of elite firefighters who bring astonishing skill to dousing fires they themselves ignited.
The lowering ceiling
What this feels like from inside is less ideological than physical:
China feels like a space in which the ceiling keeps getting lower. To stay means that we have to walk around with our heads lowered and our backs hunched.
The state doesn’t need to ban every alternative life. It only needs the ceiling to keep descending. Ambitious founders go to Singapore, people with money go to Japan, and free spirits drift toward Thailand. Even Dali, long a refuge for bohemians, becomes less tenable once the center notices it is a hub for people who do not want to be molded. Men are exhorted to work for national greatness, women to bear children, and entrepreneurs are allowed to be dynamic until dynamism looks like independent power.
This is where exit, voice and loyalty becomes concrete. Exit is hard because of passports, family, capital controls and language. Voice is punished or drowned by censorship. During the Shanghai lockdown, even the first line of the national anthem, “Arise, you who refuse to be slaves,” became sensitive. So loyalty remains, but increasingly as posture rather than belief, and the private question changes from “How do I win?” to “How do I preserve some interior space?” That is a dangerous shift for a system whose legitimacy has depended on rising expectations.
Xi’s essential bet is that China contains an inexhaustible stock of dynamism and that the party-state can steer it toward semiconductors, ships, babies, steel and national rejuvenation. The bet is not ridiculous, because China really does contain extraordinary human energy. The risk is that dynamism is not clay that can be seized, kneaded and fired into whatever shape the center prefers. People can comply and still go spiritually limp.
What Beijing sees first
The strongest case on the other side is that Beijing is often early to real problems. It saw the dangers of financialization before the United States took them seriously, recognized that private tutoring had become an arms race consuming family life, and understood that speculative property could turn from development engine into trap. The US treats its inability to build ships, infrastructure or strategic goods as if it were the weather. China built roughly half the world’s ships by gross tonnage in 2022, while the US had around 0.2 percent of capacity.
Behind that number is a real advantage: Process knowledge is hard to write down as instruction. You can give someone a well-equipped kitchen and a detailed recipe, but without cooking experience it is hard to make a great dish. Japanese caretakers rebuild the Ise Grand Shrine every generation so the knowledge of making it never leaves their hands. Chinese workers make much of the world’s goods, so they hold that kind of tacit knowledge at civilizational scale, and Western observers often underrate it because they confuse knowing the name of a thing with knowing how to make it.
But state seriousness is not the same as wisdom. China can correctly identify the decadence of financialized capitalism and still crush private confidence. It can get better at making ships while getting worse at allowing speech.
Why Solaris
Holding both halves at once is hard, which is why China is so easy to describe badly. It resembles the thinking ocean in Stanislaw Lem’s Solaris: a vast entity that produces observations personalized for every observer. Leftists can see socialism, investors capitalism, hawks a threat, engineers competence, dissidents suffocation, and each view is supported by evidence. The mistake is to pick the observation that flatters your prior and call it China. Flattening it also turns China into a unitary optimizer that can calculate but never interpret, fear or change its mind, the map error of denied interiority.
The fever medicine sits right on that seam. It came from a state competent enough to control the pharmacies of 1.4 billion people and certain enough of its method to use that power against the people it was protecting. A stupid state fails because it cannot act. A capable overconfident state fails because it can. The open question is whether a system built around control can keep drawing on human dynamism without slowly poisoning its sources, because the scariest thing is how often Beijing’s solutions become the next problem.
References: