Chinezii

Dintr-un comentariu de pe MoA am ajuns la un articol despre chinezi. Îl citez complet:

Capitalism is losing appeal to Chinese
Source:Global Times Published: 2019/12/12 21:48:40

As China has stood on a higher level of development, it is having a different way of dealing with, and understanding Western countries. It’s fair to say the Chinese people now have the most profound and objective understanding of capitalism.

The US is representative of capitalism. Many Chinese used to adore the US. But with China and the US increasingly having interdependent interests, the Chinese people have begun to understand the US from a new perspective.

We find that the US, though powerful, has many problems and made many mistakes. The US House of Representatives is moving to impeach the president.

If it were long ago, many Chinese would have regarded it a good example of checks and balances. But now, more people believe the US is messing with itself again.

The two camps that support and oppose the impeachment fall along Democrat and Republican lines. US government shutdowns caused by ceaseless partisan squabbling in recent years have exposed the inefficiency of the American system.

Documents disclosed by US media recently reveal that the US government has been deceiving the public about the war in Afghanistan. Although it realized the war had become unwinnable, it kept saying the US was making progress, extending the war to 18 years at a cost of $2 trillion and resulting in mass casualties, without bringing any benefits to the US. The US democratic system has failed to prevent the country from making such a blunder, but has made it quite difficult to fix.

The recklessness, impulse and irrationality of US policies are particularly shown in the country’s dealings with China. The US has failed to base their policies on facts and has misjudged China. Many of its practices are not in line with US long-term interests.

Let’s have a look at other capitalist countries around the world. India, whose situation was similar to that of China decades ago, has fallen behind China in development. A majority of the developing countries in the world have adopted a political system of capitalism, but only a few have achieved rapid development and good governance. Most have a lackluster performance, and some have even slipped into turmoil.

All these at least tell the Chinese that capitalism is not a panacea. The economic and social achievements of Western countries cannot prove the institutional advantages of capitalism. And many problems appearing in developed countries have reflected the capitalist system’s institutional flaws. The image of the capitalist system now is the most complex, and it’s constantly declining.

The Hong Kong unrest has taught the Chinese mainland society a “political lesson.” In the originally prosperous Hong Kong society, huge systematic loopholes were lurking. As a result, the city is unable to withstand turmoil, and its rule of law has been ruined easily.

We are living in a highly ideological world. A political system is a basic structure developed by each country. But the competition between nations has highlighted the negation of each other’s political systems as a means of struggle.

In the past few decades, China’s high degree of opening-up has expanded into the ideological field. The country has been unswervingly following the path of socialism with Chinese characteristics while learning from the world.

Through opening-up, we have had a close look at capitalism in all its forms and have observed various problems. Meantime, the US and other Western countries have been out of touch with reality, blindly believing in the “end of history” and demonizing China politically.

What matters to a country most is perhaps its ability to reform. No country’s governance system is perfect. With the changes of the times, continuous reform is the guarantee of a country’s progress.

In terms of reform capacity, the Western capitalist countries, such as the US, are far from role models to the world.

Cu această ocazie, încă un articol, din aceeași “seră”.

US could determine unlikely ‘China-Russia alliance’
By Ling Shengli Source:Global Times Published: 2019/12/12 20:13:40

Earlier this month, US magazine The National Interest published an article entitled “Donald Trump’s Greatest National Security Threat: A China-Russia Alliance.”

This statement doesn’t come as a surprise since Polish-American political scientist Zbigniew Brzezinski suggested two decades ago in his book The Grand Chessboard that the US should stay vigilant about the alliance of rival countries in Eurasia. The alliance that Brzezinski pointed out, more specifically, was the possible alliance between China and Russia.

US political scientist Samuel Huntington also expressed his concern about the probable alliance among Islamic civilization, Orthodox civilization and Confucian civilization in his book The Clash of Civilizations.

Since Trump took office, he has been emphasizing superpower competition. In his first National Security Strategy, issued in 2017, China and Russia have already been listed as “revisionist powers” and “challengers” to the US. So, is it well-reasoned that the perceived China-Russia alliance is becoming the biggest national security threat to the US? Is the so-called alliance a real nightmare or a figment of imagination of the US?

There have been ups and downs in China-Russia relations over the past seven decades. For quite a long time, Western countries have been speculating about a possible establishment of an alliance between China and Russia. However, both Beijing and Moscow have already declared multiple times that their relations are a partnership rather than an alliance. There is no way back to the China-Soviet Union alliance in the Cold War era.

Based on history and the current international situation, China and Russia have pioneered a new type of relationship featuring non-alliance, non-confrontation and non-targeting at any third party. Although there is close cooperation between the two countries in many fields, such as politics, economy, security and culture, they are partners instead of allies, which the leaders of both countries have made clear.

Fu Ying, chairperson of the Foreign Affairs Committee of China’s National People’s Congress, wrote in US magazine Foreign Affairs in 2016 that “China has no interest in a formal alliance with Russia, nor in an anti-US or anti-Western bloc of any kind. Rather, Beijing hopes that the two neighbors can maintain their relations in a way that will provide a safe environment for the two countries to achieve their development goals and to support each other through mutually beneficial cooperation, offering a model for how major countries can manage their differences and cooperate in ways that strengthen the international system.”

Military alliance is an important form of international security cooperation. Yet its drawbacks have been exposed after the Cold War. The existing military alliances, especially those of the US, are mostly the remnants of the Cold War. There are very few new alliances formed among other countries after the period, which mirrors that military alliances are no longer compatible with the needs of the times. Forming an alliance will weaken the strategic autonomy of both China and Russia.

Security cooperation is one of the components in relations among countries. Close national security cooperation does not equal a military alliance. Nowadays, the security cooperation between China and Russia deals with the conventional and unconventional security threats, protecting the two countries, the regions they are in as well as the world. In fact, China also has close security cooperation with many other countries, such as Pakistan and Kazakhstan, but the country has also articulated those bilateral relations as featuring non-alliance and non-targeting at any third party.

Currently, the world is generally peaceful and stable. Yet conventional and unconventional security threats are entangled. No country can cope with them alone. Moreover, unconventional threats are spreading in a borderless way, which makes military alliance of no use.

Thus, security cooperation is a viable solution. The reason why China follows the non-alignment policy, promotes partnership rather than alliance, is to embrace the new type of security cooperation rather than the traditional military alliance. Moscow also sees the partnership with Beijing as the best option for itself. The two have also learned a lesson from their previous alliance.

China, the US and Russia are regarded as the three most important forces in international arena. If there will be an alliance between China and Russia, it will definitely trigger a chain reaction in relations among the trio, which could possibly increase military tensions and do more harm than good.

On the whole, forming alliances is a strategy based on self-interest and mutual interest. But it is not a wise choice for both China and Russia in the foreseeable future. The US definitely does not want to see an alliance between its “challengers,” which can be a huge threat to its hegemony. Even though the US is well aware that China and Russia will not form any alliance in the near future, it still tends to hype up such speculation due to its pursuit of absolute security.

With increasing global uncertainty and instability, the international order is facing more challenges. Intensifying collaboration between China and Russia is a response to US unilateralism, as it is gradually damaging the international system.

In other words, whether an alliance between China and Russia alliance would be formed some day in the future, though it is unlikely now, could depend heavily on the US.

The author is secretary-general of the International Security Study Center at China Foreign Affairs University. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn

Și acest articol.

Does the US have shortage of philosophers?

By Liu Zhiqin Source:Global Times Published: 2019/12/12 20:03:40

The US can boast of a good many world renowned scientists, skilled diplomats, top sportsmen and numerous arts and culture icons. There is no shortage of military strategists or writers either. Yet this promised land seems to run low on philosophers.

Isn’t it paradoxical?

This wealthiest country on the Earth has the creme de la creme from all walks of life, and top notch professionals command the best salaries. All types of professionals except philosophers have a market value in the US. They don’t have much of a podium, and have a small fan base. Not to mention, their work is not up to American standards.

With just a pinch of exaggeration, I’d say, the Americans are running a deficit in philosophy.

Is philosophy that important?

Of course, it is. Philosophy is the guiding principle of governance based on the premises of which citizens bond and countries deals with foreign relations. On state level, a philosophical governor will not be blinded by pure interests. On personal level, man with philosophical thinking has his own compass to navigate through the mist of ideologies and seemingly contradicting behaviors.

The way the US has been conducting its foreign affairs lately indicates its lack of philosophical wisdom in foreign policy.

We can compare how differently the US and China deal with conflicts.

The philosophical foundation of China seeks common ground despite the differences; do unto others as you would have others do unto you; promises must be kept and action must be resolute.

What Washington seems to act upon are totally different – Take it or leave it; Fan the fire of colored revolution in order to impose US values; Retreat from international forums breaching the trust of its own people.

It seems quite obvious by comparing these two countries that the US way of thinking only serves to irritate its opponents and does no good in resolving conflicts.

History has shown that governments with little philosophical wisdom act on a whim. They are unpredictable and irresponsible. Their actions cannot be explained by logic and they tend to ignore the consequences.

Some will argue the Americans have their own set of philosophical thinking on democracy, freedom, market economy and so on. Yet as if designed by a wanton child, their policies are confusing and opaque, unhinged from the beneficial roots of philosophy. Even though there are traces of pragmatism in international relations, these short-lived policies only show how myopic the statesmen are.

On the contrary, developing countries such as China pay much attention to philosophical research, based on which we explore how to best amplify the advantage of our social system and how to counter the negative effect of our disadvantages.

Any sensible statesman will recognize philosophical wisdom is in effect a form of productivity, a reflection of a country’s soft power and an indispensable tool for policymakers.

It has to be stated with much regret that although the US is a giant in the field of science, it is a dwarf in philosophical thinking. And it is unfortunate not only for its own people but beyond.

The author is a senior fellow of the Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies at Renmin University of China. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn

Ceea ce este uimitor nu este numai conținutul, de așteptat de la niște ciumați roșii, pe deasupra și gălbejiți, dar, mai ales, stilul: vioi, alert, plin de prospețime, de o sagacitate îndelung consolidată…

Să punem GT la bookmarks…