Lawyers vs Engineers: Which System Will Win the US-China Race?

The US-China conflict has become a constant rather than a variable in the global economy. Every time the two superpowers clash, global financial markets and the real economy tremble. South Korea, politically and economically intertwined with both nations, finds itself at the center of this hegemonic struggle. Korean flagship industries including semiconductors, automobiles, steel, petrochemicals, and shipbuilding face mounting pressure from the US while being aggressively pursued by Chinese competitors.

Dan Wang, a prominent China analyst based in Silicon Valley, examines the two superpowers through an original framework: "the nation of lawyers" versus "the nation of engineers" in his book "Breakneck." According to Wang, lawyer-dominated societies excel at defending existing orders and blocking disruptive challenges, while engineer-led nations demonstrate strength in creating innovations.

The contrast begins at the very top of each nation's leadership. Deng Xiaoping elevated engineers and technicians to the highest levels of government throughout the 1980s and 1990s. By 2022, all seven members of the Chinese Communist Party's Politburo Standing Committee—the party's supreme decision-making body—held engineering degrees. President Xi Jinping himself graduated from Tsinghua University's chemical engineering department. This power structure has fostered what Wang calls China's distinctive "engineering state spirit," encouraging construction and production at breathtaking speed. The book's title, "Breakneck," meaning "dangerously fast," aptly describes China's approach.

In contrast, seven US presidents majored in law, including Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. When expanded to include those who held law licenses, the number approaches 30. More than half of US House representatives hold law-related degrees. Wang argues that with lawyers positioned throughout American politics and society, judicial procedures including regulations and litigation have become the nation's paramount values. This, he suggests, explains why American automotive and semiconductor companies declined over the past three decades while Chinese manufacturers thrived.

Wall Street's investment culture also contributed to American manufacturing's collapse, Wang contends. Wall Street concentrated on capital-light digital platforms like social media and search engines while neglecting manufacturing investment. As manufacturers relocated to China and other overseas locations, the US exposed its "manufacturing hollowing-out" during the COVID-19 pandemic, struggling to procure even basic supplies. Xi, by contrast, has emphasized that "the real economy is the foundation of everything, and we must never deindustrialize"—the opposite of America's trajectory.

The two nations also differ fundamentally in their approaches to technological innovation. The US celebrates moments of invention: the first solar cell, the first personal computer, the first airplane. In China, technological innovation begins on production floors where new products are mass-manufactured. China currently has over 100 million manufacturing workers—eight times the US figure. Apple CEO Tim Cook has lamented this gap, noting that while gathering mold specialists in the US might not fill a single conference room, China could easily fill multiple soccer stadiums.

Will China, with its manufacturing and hardware capabilities crucial for international competition, overtake the US for global hegemony? Wang offers no definitive answer. While engineering-oriented thinking has driven rapid Chinese economic growth, the engineering state's vulnerabilities and limitations have also become apparent. China's "one-child policy" launched in the 1980s and coercive pandemic control measures exemplify the pitfalls of engineering thinking fixated on numbers and efficiency.

Where does South Korea fall between "the nation of lawyers" and "the nation of engineers"? If forced to choose, it appears closer to the former. Korea has already produced four presidents with legal backgrounds, and one in five current National Assembly members comes from the legal profession. Regulations on new industries, exemplified by the "Tada Ban Law" restricting ride-sharing services, represent inevitable outcomes of a lawyer-dominated society. Wang's argument that the US must cultivate diverse voices at the highest levels to overcome its lawyer-centric system applies equally to South Korea.

"The most important American virtue is belief in pluralism. This means not only lawyers but also engineers, economists, and other humanists must all step forward to help the nation work for the many, not the few."