Analysis of: ‘We wanted a taste of what they had’: the Beijing restaurant dining out on Starmer visit
The Guardian | May 3, 2026
TL;DR
A Beijing restaurant capitalizes on Starmer's diplomatic visit, revealing how soft power spectacle masks the economic interests driving UK-China relations. Celebrity diplomacy sells meals while obscuring the material stakes of imperialist reorientation.
Analytical Focus:Historical Context Contradictions Interconnections
This story about a Beijing restaurant capitalizing on Prime Minister Starmer's visit operates as a case study in how soft power narratives function ideologically. The article presents international diplomacy as a charming cultural exchange—viral menus, celebrity dining, football fandom—while largely obscuring the material economic interests driving the UK's diplomatic 'reset' with China. The framing naturalizes state relations as matters of personality ('friendly and approachable') rather than as negotiations between capitalist blocs over trade access, investment flows, and supply chain positioning. The historical context is significant: this represents the first UK prime ministerial visit to China since 2018, occurring amid what the article euphemistically calls the 'post-Brexit years' when Britain 'took a battering.' The visit signals a potential realignment in which a weakened post-Brexit Britain seeks new trade relationships outside its traditional Western alliance structures. The soft power angle—Premier League popularity, Cambridge aspirations, Rosamund Pike's fanbase—serves to humanize what is fundamentally an economic negotiation between competing capitalist interests. The central contradiction illuminated here lies between the cultural spectacle and the material stakes it conceals. The article mentions domestic criticism of Starmer's China engagement and his precarious political position, hinting at class-based opposition to policies that may benefit capital mobility while doing little for British workers. The Chinese consumer's desire to 'taste what they had' becomes an unwitting metaphor for aspirational class dynamics reproduced across borders, while the real beneficiaries—transnational capital and the political-economic elites managing these relationships—remain conveniently out of frame.
Class Dynamics
Actors: British political elite (Starmer administration), Chinese middle-class consumers, Restaurant ownership/hospitality capital, British working class (implied, absent), Chinese working class (service workers, briefly mentioned), Transnational capitalist class
Beneficiaries: Beijing restaurant owners capitalizing on diplomatic publicity, British and Chinese capitalist interests seeking expanded trade relations, Political establishment seeking legitimacy through 'successful' diplomacy, Hospitality industry and tourism sector
Harmed Parties: British workers facing domestic economic crisis while resources go to diplomatic spectacle, Service workers serving the spectacle (mentioned but not interviewed about their conditions), Those affected by policies prioritizing capital mobility over labor protections
The article centers elite diplomatic actors and middle-class consumers while rendering workers invisible except as service providers. The waiter is quoted only about Starmer's demeanor, not about his own working conditions or wages. This framing reproduces class hierarchies where workers exist to facilitate consumption by their economic betters, naturalizing the idea that international relations are conducted by and for elites while ordinary people participate only as consumers of the resulting cultural byproducts.
Material Conditions
Economic Factors: Post-Brexit economic realignment and search for new trade partners, UK's diminished economic leverage in global markets, China's economic influence and consumer market access, Tourism and hospitality industry revenue, Higher education as export commodity (Cambridge reference)
The restaurant operates within typical hospitality capital relations—workers provide service labor while owners extract surplus from both the labor and the political-cultural moment. The broader context involves Britain seeking access to Chinese markets and investment while China seeks legitimation through Western diplomatic engagement. The story obscures these production relations entirely, focusing instead on consumption spectacle.
Resources at Stake: UK-China trade agreements and market access, Investment flows between the two economies, Educational services as commodity (international student recruitment), Cultural capital and soft power positioning, Political legitimacy for both governments
Historical Context
Precedents: Janet Yellen's 2023 visit and its similar commodification, Historical pattern of diplomatic visits generating commercial opportunities, Post-colonial British soft power reliance as material power declines, UK's pivot away from Europe following Brexit, Long history of using cultural exchange to mask imperial/economic interests
This represents a late-stage capitalist pattern where declining imperial powers seek to leverage residual cultural capital—'soft power'—to maintain economic relevance. Britain's trajectory mirrors other former empires: as manufacturing capacity declined and financial services became dominant, cultural exports (education, entertainment, heritage tourism) became increasingly important economic sectors. The desperation underlying this charm offensive reflects Britain's weakened position in the global capitalist hierarchy post-Brexit, seeking bilateral deals from a position of relative weakness rather than as part of the EU bloc.
Contradictions
Primary: The contradiction between the spectacle of successful diplomacy (viral menus, cultural exchange) and the material reality of economic decline and political instability that necessitated the visit. Starmer may be 'forced out of office' while his Beijing dinner becomes a tourist attraction—the soft power success cannot resolve the underlying economic contradictions driving domestic discontent.
Secondary: Contradiction between Britain's historical role as imperial power and its current position seeking favor with rising powers, Tension between domestic criticism of China engagement and elite pursuit of Chinese capital, The gap between aspirational consumption (wanting 'what they had') and actual material conditions of Chinese consumers, Contradiction between diplomatic 'reset' rhetoric and fundamental competition between capitalist blocs
These contradictions are unlikely to resolve through diplomatic spectacle. If Starmer's political position collapses domestically, the 'goodwill' accumulated becomes worthless—revealing soft power as derivative of actual material power. More fundamentally, the structural competition between Western and Chinese capital cannot be reconciled through restaurant menus; the contradictions will likely intensify as economic pressures mount and each bloc seeks advantages at the expense of working classes in both countries.
Global Interconnections
This story connects to broader patterns of inter-imperialist competition in the current phase of global capitalism. The UK's pivot toward China reflects the multipolar restructuring of the global economy, as the US-led Western bloc faces challenges from Chinese capital accumulation. Britain's post-Brexit isolation has weakened its negotiating position, forcing it to seek bilateral arrangements that may conflict with US interests—a fracturing of the Western alliance structure that characterized the post-WWII period. The soft power framing also reveals how ideology operates in international relations. By reducing diplomacy to charming anecdotes about mushroom dishes and football fandom, the article participates in what Gramsci would recognize as hegemonic common sense: making elite negotiations appear as universal cultural exchange rather than as contests over capital accumulation and market access. The Chinese consumer wanting to 'taste what they had' mirrors broader aspirational dynamics that sustain capitalist legitimacy—the promise that consumption can provide access to elite status, even as structural barriers remain firmly in place.
Conclusion
This seemingly light human-interest story reveals how cultural spectacle functions to obscure material interests in international relations. For workers in both Britain and China, the relevant questions aren't what Starmer ordered for dinner but what trade arrangements will affect their wages, working conditions, and job security. The article's framing encourages identification with elite consumption rather than interrogation of whose interests are actually served by diplomatic 'resets.' As Britain's domestic contradictions intensify—economic stagnation, political instability, declining public services—soft power spectacles offer diminishing returns. The task for class-conscious analysis is to look past the mushroom menus to the material stakes underneath: which workers will bear the costs of capital's free movement, and which capitalists will reap the benefits of these carefully staged dinners.
Suggested Reading
- Prison Notebooks (Selections) by Antonio Gramsci (1935) Gramsci's analysis of hegemony and 'common sense' illuminates how soft power narratives naturalize elite interests as universal cultural exchange, making this story's ideological function visible.
- Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism by V.I. Lenin (1917) Lenin's framework for understanding inter-imperialist competition provides essential context for analyzing UK-China relations as contests between capitalist blocs rather than cultural diplomacy.
- The Divide: A Brief Guide to Global Inequality by Jason Hickel (2017) Hickel's accessible account of global inequality helps situate the UK's post-Brexit repositioning within broader patterns of unequal exchange and shifting power in the world system.