Samuel Huntington argued in his essay 'the clash of civilisation?' that cultural fault lines would become a defining feature of the post-Cold War world in 1993. Nonetheless, there is still a good wish made by the American that China will become democratic at home and to develop into 'a responsible stakeholder' as former U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick described.
Huntington's argument is noted as a trailer in signify the culture conflict between 'Western and Islamic civilisations' after the 9/11 attacks. And he held the same opinion of the relationship between the U.S. led Western and China civilisation as deep, enduring, and consequential.
The possible presence of 'universal civilization' is a unilateral Western notion, and most Asian societies may have the adversarial claim that focusing on what distinguishes one people from another.
This sort of threat that bolsters a rising power will displace an established power is definitely not a new thing under the sun. It probably reminds us the conflict resulted from Thucydides's trap. The ancient Greek historian who observed dangerous dynamic between a rising Athens and ruling Sparta. 'it was the rise of Athen, and the fear that this instilled in sparta, that made war inevitable' provided by Thucydides. And also, it also applies to the conflict over the power of sea between the Spain and United Kingdom.
Rising powers understandably feel a growing sense of entitlement and demand greater influence and respect, while established powers tend to become fearful, insecure and defensive when faced with new challenges. it is noticeable that in such sort situation where empathy remains elusive and misunderstandings are magnified, any inconsequential or manageable events or actions from third-party would otherwise trigger wars that the primary players never wanted to fight.
The mismatch is easily observed in the profound differences between American and Chinese conceptions of the state, economics, the role of individuals, relations among nations and, the nature of time.
Americans see government as a necessary evil and believe that the state's tendency toward tyranny and abuse of power must be feared and constrained. For Chinese, the government is necessary good, the fundamental pillar ensuring order and preventing chaos. In American-style free-market capitalism, the government establishes and enforces the rules. The state ownership and government intervention occur with only undesirable exceptions. Nevertheless, China implements state-led market economy and the government establishes a target for growth, picks and subsidizes industries to develop, promotes national champions and undertakes significant, long-term economic projects to advance the interests of that nation.
Chinese culture does not embody American-style individualism and otherwise resist such kind of opinion that put selfish in priority over the interest of the whole community. More freedom of individuals is equivalent to the more chaos implied in a community. Nothing is more important than the order and harmony required by a hierarchy where a person is obliged to perform in accordance with the 'place' or 'position' in Confucius culture.
these features may not conclude the complexities of the divide of American and Chinese society but exist as a warning for policymakers in the U.S. and China to seek to avoid the war and manage the competition in the next generation.
网友评论