As someone who has grown up in and is Chinese, I very much disagree with this sentiment, especially in modern day. There has always been a discordant and uncomfortable relationship with authority in Chinese culture- we are polite to put on airs to our authorities but we also secretly hate them in some respects. We understand they are human, like us, but for the sake of society rule airs are put on to keep them. It has always been understood that authority and corruption are tightly bound, perhaps even more understood than in America.
The young see all the holes the government has and both desires to being justice and also acutely feel the burdens of society's structure on them, but to upend society has an almost horrific cultural connotation, a cultural catastophe referred to only as "that critical time" or "those difficult times". In this triangulation we have also the need for simple food, water, love, shelter, peace. The modern world and the ancient world are so intertwined in China, that going of the cities is like a form of time travel. The difference between my mother's home village and the city less than 1 hour away by train is the entire industrial revolution.
Much of modern China is also influences from "the critical time" on the modern history. China still has not recovered, culturally, emotionally. It might never will, not in any real way. People have been producing this kind of literature since that time. The most accurate thing in the article is when the article notes that China might "always" have been like this.
Yes, China has always been like this in its own way. China has had these methods of storytelling for a long, long time. Now the new generation of writers is applying this methods to modern problems and modern society in its complex, cage-like structure that everyone is aware of in their bones.
I disagree with the assessment that this is "crazy" or "coming to grips with a fundamental truth is no longer true". It is a rational consequence of applying ancient storytelling methods to a complex triangulation of the new generation's situation, where we are all aware that the government is a corrupt and easily-swayed monster, but social upheaval is horrifically dangerous monster in its own right. It is a problem with no certain solution, so we write.
In historical context the Chinese have every right to be weary. Between WW2 and the "Great Leap Forward" over fifty million have died due to famine and warfare, either inflicted by international forces or the ruling class.
Only ordinary Chinese citizens are not childlike and easily led at all (that's an early colonial misunderstanding) -- they are just as smart and street-wise as we are, and understand all the gritty details -- they always did.
Another example was given to me by a coworker: after Fukushima, she realized that her employer ultimately did not care about her safety in a regional-paralyzing event. That shattered her world view about how she would be viewed as an object, not a person, by employers. This was despite all the women-in-tech, no-glass-ceiling, etc rhetoric. She vowed to take a new job where she would consider only employers that had demonstrated an active commitment to their employee's safety. It changed her world view about PR pieces put out by companies, especially with regards to diversity.
Edit: To conclude, I personally believe there is an opportunity for personal growth about learning a healthy distrust in what government or politically-active people have to say in any country, including the USA, for everyone. Including myself. I truly did not mean to single out the Chinese in a degrading manner.
When the rules of the game change drastically - we are all children until we figure out the new ones.
However, I think that it is too broad in its generalizations to be viable, and it does not pay enough attention to the actual historical context of circumstances in China.
In China's history the oligarchy/government/emperors were always been regarded as the oppressor, the enemy, the bad guy, by ordinary Chinese. They got power through violence or family line. So people didn't care much, other than paying the painfully exorbitant taxes. For people it's the village leaders/families that actually had intimate ties with them. I think perhaps a better analogy for the world-shattering change facing by today's China might be an isolated tribe being suddenly exposed to modern capitalism/commerce/ideas of freedom/etc., and felt lost, and is searching for ways to go forward, while there are no applicable lessons either from its own history or the hugely different western countries. It's truly remarkable.
You can't really talk about a Chinese society and only bring up Confucianism as it is also a mix of Daoism and Buddhism - all three of which are at odds with each other.
I would think Daosim and its ideas of the needs and rights of "self" would be closer linked to official corruption than that of Confucianism.
I believe the same thing is happening right now in modern China. Simply substitute constituents and the oligarchy instead for the child and parent. When the citizens realize the infallible groupthink propaganda touted by the ruling class is in fact being touted by people inflicted with the human condition, they also experience a change in world view. Again, this change is "crazy" and more chaotic: A fundamental truth in their world view is no longer true.
Remember, China favored building a society on Confucianism where society had a set order. There is no room for the chaos in a Confucian society. However, the less-promoted Dao De Jing was written in an attempt to perfectly capture the chaos, contradictions, and hypocrisies of reality. And in a way, applying its teachings to itself indicates it both succeeds and fails in doing so.
The "ultra-unrealism" that the author keeps espousing seems to me a reaction for coming to grips to the mind-expanding change that comes when realizing a truth previously fundamental is no longer true. I am not trying to dismiss their feelings but am appreciating the personal growth. I hope others do too.