The scene has gone down in historical infamy. When Lord Macartney, envoy of Great Britain went to meet Emperor Qianlong of the Qing Dynasty (1644-1911), he was required to kowtow to the King of the Middle Kingdom. The idea of open trade he brought was dismissed by the Emperor.

The results are known to all. The Qing Dynasty's arrogance and seclusion were seen as reasons that led to its fall. Over the following one and a half centuries, China kept seeking ways out of its backwardness.

When British Prime Minister David Cameron visited China early this month with a 100-member strong business delegation, he was criticized by UK media for "selling his soul."

This feeling of condescension while striking huge business deals is nothing new to the Chinese public, as the emotion has appeared nearly every time a high-level trade delegation from "Old Europe" has visited China.

It seems that Europe as a whole is lost as to whether to make economically sensible decisions or stick to ideological principles when dealing with China. Last week, the European Parliament passed a resolution on the issue of so called "organ harvesting" claims by the Falun Gong cult.

This year marks the 10th anniversary of the establishment of the EU-China Comprehensive Strategic Partnership. Trade volume has grown from $125.2 billion in 2003 to $546 billion in 2012, according to data from the Ministry of Commerce. But the impressive figure cannot hide the bleak lack of strategic trust between the two.

 Putting business above politics appears to be an embarrassing choice to Europe. China's exports and investment in the continent are met with strong suspicion and resistance. Debates of ideology versus business are familiar to the Chinese, ever since the early stages of the reform and opening-up period decades ago. Pragmatism helped the country overcome ideological obstacles and charted a path of development that suits itself best.

Despite historical scars, Europe often strikes a positive emotion among Chinese, as various polls have indicated. It might stem from the fact that the two sides are not engaged in serious geopolitical or territorial competition. In other words, the Sino-European relationship is in a good position to develop into a model of major power relations.

But the positive dynamics have been constantly soured by Europe's stance on issues ranging from human rights to the Dalai Lama. From China's perspective, Europe is bouncing between pragmatism and idealism. But value diplomacy in Europe has been less of an issue for China than for Europe, where the confusion between past and present has deepened. The past legacy has seemingly become a shackle to Europeans that makes it difficult for them to adapt to the new global realities.

Business opportunities brought by China have been criticized as mercantilism, though free trade is a concept China adopted from Europe. China doesn't deny the problems it has in society and the flaws in its political system, and it is still learning from the experiences from other countries, including its European counterparts.

In terms of social governance, legal systems and financial structures, even Europe's political civilization, China believes it lags behind Europe and strives to catch up.

What annoys the Chinese public is the constant lecturing from the Europe on its country's social ills. Two years ago, a topic frequently discussed between the two sides was whether China could save Europe from the financial crisis. Though the Chinese were concerned about lending to a continent addicted to high welfare, it wasn't made into a lengthy political issue. China didn't seek to transform Europe based on its own will, even two centuries ago when its strength was in its heyday.

China has had its learning curve of overcoming ideological confinement while seeking development, and this lesson is worth pondering.

The author is a commentator with the Global Times. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn