Jim O´Neill proposed, in 2001, that BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, and China - South Africa joined after) would be much more significant in 2030. And one of the reasons stated by Jim was that China - as the more prominent world´ economy - would have the responsibility to lead the world, indirectly by voting on ONU, by affecting the markets and so on... And if so, what do you think... would China be a better world leader than the US?
China can not be a world leader because it has no model and no moral. See my publication China in Africa (Oxford Bibliographies and researchgate.net), but the short argument is: The so-called Beijing concensus is not a model to develop a country (Van Dijk, ed., 2009: 22). Simlarly, limiting internet, freedom of speech and democracy shows no moral leadership, but a conception of human rights which is not shared by a large number of people in this world
Dear Pieter,
Ok. You have a point. Thanks for the tip of your article of 2009.
Let me ask you one more question:
Did you do the work below?
Van Dijk, M. (2013). Productivity growth at the sectoral level: measurement and projections. Selected Paper for the 16th Annual Conference on Global Analysis. Retrieved from http://edepot.wur.nl/294530
I am asking because it´s a reference for me and would be a pleasure to know that it´s from you.
Many thanks.
“It has been China’s dream for a century to become the world’s leading nation,”
I don't think China wants to be the world leader, at least in the sense associated with the USA and European powers.
The reason for this is that the desire to "make disciples of all nations" mainly arises from the cultural influence of Christianity, Islam and similar religions. The traditional Chinese religions and beliefs like Daoism and Confucianism do not have such concept. Hence, the Chinese are mostly seeking leadership on issues where Chinese interests are directly or indirectly involved, such as economy, science, technology and geopolitics.
But it would also be wrong to see the Chinese as amoral, and China strictly as a power driven by Bismarckian realpolitik and national interest. While the Chinese are generally indifferent towards certain (but not all) Western moral concepts, they have some unique ones such as "harmony", and their own view of ethics that is emphasises virtues like honesty, loyalty and generosity. Traditional Chinese philosophy of statecraft focuses on (supposedly) responsible and benevolent use of power, where subtle and indirect approaches are preferred to brute force and carrots are generally seen as better leadership than sticks. It is likely that some elements of such thinking will be reflected in the future policies. This is certainly very different from the Western tradition, in particular the approach championed by "principled" (or "moralistic", depending on your point of view) politicians.
On the other hand, one should note that the culture in China has already substantially changed (because of rapid development and foreign influences), so one should not read too much from historical examples.
Dear Dr. Antti Rasila,
You did an incredible explanation.
It´s very interesting to me, as I am a macroeconomic researcher, to receive different point of views. And yours really captured my atttention.
Thank you for sharing your vision.
I really appreciate that.
All my best wishes.
AH.
Dear Aurelio Hess,
Thanks. To my understanding the only "holistic" attempt to study what the future Chinese leadership could mean for the world is the book When China Rules the World: The End of the Western World and the Birth of a New Global Order by Martin Jacques (see http://a.co/b5vKTI0).
But this book is very speculative and written more in journalistic than academic style, so it should not be taken too seriously. Anyway, it contains lots of material you probably find interesting.
A talk by the author is available from TED. In this talk he repeats the main themes of the book, so you can check it and see if the book is worth reading for you https://www.ted.com/talks/martin_jacques_understanding_the_rise_of_china
Some additional materials are on his web page, see
http://www.martinjacques.com
Best regards,
Antti
Dear Antti,
WOW... thanks for the tips and links.
I research Sustainable Economic Development (especially on BRICS - Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa). This book will be good to me. But I will begin by TED talk.
Thank you very much.
AH
Dear Scientists,
While I work on my research projects, I share some parts with specialists to have some support and critics. I believe that it makes better the quality of my work.
Thank you to have participated actively in the discussions I proposed. Your vision is a very good contribution to me. The best way to make me a better scientist.
All the best for all of you.
AH
In my opinion, given the potential and infrastructure of political, economic, cultural, political, and religious politics, China has made China's progress possible and feasible, and it needs to change infrastructure, and this process of progress is up to one roof and can not be a global economic leader, and if it is to be a cross-sectional one Because it does not have the necessary financial support for the economic leader
- Badges
- Science topic