Is the Coronavirus to Blame for Backlash Against Chinese Green Card Changes?

China’s restrictions on foreigners seeking permanent residence in the country have been gradually loosening since 2016. And as we reported last week, the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) took another step forward recently in allowing foreigners permanent residence in the country by proposing new rules for the "green card" application process.

What has the response been?

The changes, if passed, would not be the first time that the rules have been expanded to allow more foreigners to apply, but compared to the little or no reaction that previous changes were met with, this new proposed draft has sparked a huge netizen backlash, including many racist and nationalistic sentiments.

A cursory glance at the trending page for the hashtag "Regulations on the Management of Foreigner Permanent Residence" (#外国人永久居留管理条例#) on Weibo might lead one to the conclusion that China is about to be overrun with foreigners who will never leave. But many of the online comments, which seem to be overwhelmingly concerned with immigration from Africa, are in no discernible way based on the actual changes to the current law, which primarily relate to high-income foreigners with talents in specific developing industries such as economics, tech, education, and sports.

A certain segment of the disgruntled netizens is also deeply concerned with the issue of Chinese men "protecting" Chinese women from foreigners. Apparently, the draft’s clause on allowing foreigners who marry a Chinese national to obtain permanent residence sparked fears that foreign men would be weaseling their way into a wedding with a Chinese women in order to reduce their annual visa paperwork load, even though this policy is already in place – the clause is left over from the current policy.

Not all criticisms of the proposal are completely irrational. Some criticize ease of which qualified foreign candidates may apply for a permanent residence while Chinese citizens must jump through hoops to gain a hukou in the city of their choice. While these criticisms are valid, they are not necessarily more relevant now than the last time the rules were expanded. So what has changed?

A reaction with deeper roots

If it is not the actual content of the draft that triggered online outrage, what was it? One explanation might be that the MoJ drew attention to the draft by asking for public input. However, the timing of the proposal should not be overlooked: the draft was released in the midst of coronavirus panic.

There is a concept that has been popularized in the field of social psychology over the past couple of decades called the behavioral immune system. The term was coined by psychological scientist Mark Schaller to explain human behavior in reacting to indicators of disease. Schaller and his colleagues even linked xenophobic attitudes to indicators of disease in experiments that demonstrated how respondents were less likely to favor policies that welcomed foreigners into their country after being shown a slideshow of images associated with diseases, such as bacteria or other pathogens.

In other words, according to the theory, humans are more likely to fear outsiders when they sense a threat to their health. Research by Schaller and others has shown that this fear can even lead to communities forming more conservative values and increasing conformity. As such, the theory has been used to explain political phenomena, including the rise of Donald Trump.

The theory has also been picked up evolutionary biologist Randy Thornhill, who has attributed liberalization around the world to increased medical capabilities. According to Thornhill and his colleagues, it’s not just that disease contributes to xenophobia, but it is the reason humans evolved to have xenophobic tendencies at all – a sensible instinct when you consider the huge numbers of deaths among indigenous peoples throughout history attributable to outside contact, and likely also occurred on a smaller scale throughout pre-history when disparate tribes met.

A conscious response or not?

Netizens responding to the proposed 'green card' changes did not overwhelmingly cite the coronavirus as a reason to fear the increased flow of foreigners into China, but it does not matter. As journalist Ethan Watters writes of Thornhill's theory for Pacific Standard, "…everyday life is full of small defensive moves against contamination, some motivated by feelings, like disgust, that arise without conscious reflection." Like these minute actions, getting worked up about foreigners in one's country may not be a consciously thought-out response to fear for one's health, but the result of a series of automatic reactions. How much those reactions are fueled by outside agents like governments and the media is dependent on the country at hand.

As China’s citizens are being exposed to news of a contagious virus on a daily basis, it is only natural that any movement towards welcoming outsiders during this time would be met with a gut reaction. For foreigners hoping to be welcomed in China, then, the timing of the proposal is unfortunate.

READ: Travel Out of Beijing Strangled as Air Routes Canceled and Ride Sharing Restricted

Image: China Times