In the competitive landscape of the global economy, few phenomena are as striking, and as cautionary, as China's "Curse of 35." For many white-collar workers in the People's Republic, the 35th birthday is no longer a milestone of mid-career maturity; it is a professional "expiration date."

What is the "Curse of 35"?

The "Curse of 35" refers to a pervasive, semi-official culture of age discrimination where workers over the age of 35 are deemed "too old" for new employment, promotions, or even job security. This is not merely a corporate trend; it was long codified in state policy. For decades, the Chinese government itself set 35 as the maximum age for most entry-level civil service positions.

In the private sector, particularly in the tech and finance industries, the "996" culture (working 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., six days a week) views 35-year-olds as liabilities. Employers argue that these workers are "too expensive," less willing to endure gruelling overtime due to family commitments, and "less adaptable" than fresh, cheaper graduates.

A Terrible Social Policy: The Conservative Critique

From a conservative perspective, the "Curse of 35" is not just a market quirk; it is a disastrous social policy that erodes the foundational pillars of a stable society. Here is why:

1. It Destroys the Family Unit

Stable families are the bedrock of any civilisation. By rendering workers obsolete at 35, exactly when they should be marrying and raising children, the state creates a profound sense of financial insecurity. If you fear losing your livelihood at 35, you are far less likely to take on a mortgage or start a family. This has contributed to China's plummeting birth rates and record-low marriage registrations.

2. It Devalues Experience and Merit

A healthy economy rewards wisdom, craftsmanship, and the institutional knowledge that only comes with years of "skin in the game." Discarding workers at the height of their cognitive and professional powers is a massive misallocation of human capital. It replaces the conservative ideal of meritocracy with a shallow "youth-ocracy," where energy is valued over expertise.

3. It Deepens State Dependency

When a society tells its middle-aged citizens they are "unemployable," it eventually forces them toward state reliance. By shortening the "useful" life of a worker, China is creating a massive demographic that is "too old to work, but too young to retire." This places an unsustainable burden on the social safety net and destroys the individual's sense of purpose and dignity.

4. It Stifles Social Mobility

The "Curse" acts as a glass ceiling for the middle class. Instead of a ladder where one climbs higher with age, the Chinese model creates a "bottleneck" where only those who reach management by 30 survive. For the rest, the ladder is simply pulled up, preventing the accumulation of intergenerational wealth that characterises a stable, conservative society.

Belatedly, Beijing has recognized the damage. Faced with a shrinking workforce and a demographic "time bomb," the government recently began raising age caps for civil service exams to 38 or 40 in some regions. However, for a culture that has internalised 35 as a "sell-by date," policy changes may be too little, too late.

The "Curse of 35" serves as a grim reminder: when a state or culture treats its citizens as mere "labour units" to be discarded after their peak utility, it doesn't just damage the economy — it breaks the social contract.