The Olympics have begun, and as with each Games, someone somewhere will try to grab the lime-light of world attention to make a political point.
And a good thing too.
One should be free to shout "Free Tibet" in Tiananmen square, or indeed, "Free Scotland" in Trafalgar square at the next Games. But I hope that legitimate concerns about the Chinese authorities don't turn into all out China-bashing.
If anyone felt strongly that China shouldn't host these games, the time to object was several years ago.
China is clearly an authoritarian country. Her people do not (yet) enjoy the liberties we take for granted. But is it right to describe China as a "terror" state, as does Edward McMillan-Scott MEP? I'd need to see more evidence.
There are all sorts countries, such as Saudi Arabia, for example, guilty of doing much more vile things. Yet last year our Foreign Office arranged to have their princlings paraded down the Mall for a Royal Banquet. If we honour such people, how can we be so shrill about China?
Behind some of the anti-Chinese rhetoric, I detect just a hint of Western resentment. Perhaps, as with anti-Americanism, anti-Chinese sentiment will become a form of Euro-jingoism?
Many commentators seem clever enough to realise that China is going places on the world stage. Yet few have thought through how we might need to respond.
Rather than hurling shrill certainties, perhaps we should use the occasion of these Olympics to ponder; the West has learnt much from China over past centuries. Perhaps its time to learn again?
In the West, we have held various assumptions that we may need to rethink.
For four decades, Europeans have assumed that pan-EU rules and regulations mean we all gain economically (economies of scale, level playing field blah, blah, blah). Yet, since the late 1970s, China has move in precisely the opposite direction. She has decentralised the way she organises her economy, and today even has different legal and regulatory systems within provinces.
Whose economy is now more dynamic? Will we not have to decentralise, too, if we are to have any hope of keeping up?
In most EU member states, the taxman routinely helps himself to some 30 - 40 per cent of company profits. Can we compete commercially with China, if we continue to do that?
In the West, we have a series of assumptions about welfare provision. Will the rise of China change this? Will Western countries be able to afford their bloated welfare State, without far-reaching reform? I don't know for sure. But I can take a wild guess.
Visiting a Chinese university last year, I watched would-be undergraduates attend an open day. Often accompanied by parents and grandparents, entire familes inspected the facilities and asked staff searching questions. Watching, I wondered if my countrymen placed that sort of value on education, and if not, why not?
The young Chinese students I met were decently patriotic, yet full of curiosity about the world. I was impressed by their ideas and questions.
There is much about China that is imperfect. Like all unaccountable elites, her technocracy is a Bad Thing. Yet, China has come along leaps and bounds. There is more to admire about modern China, than there is to rage against.
China was once overtaken by the West because we learnt from her, as she refused to learn anything from us. Today we need to learn a lot more than just how to host an Olympic games.
