Will China’s rise be peaceful?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 ก.ค. 2024
- Will China's rise be peaceful? What can we learn from history? Can the EU still serve as an example? With José Manuel Barroso, Eric Li and Michael Ignatieff. Watch the entire debate: nexus-instituut.nl/en/activit....
the question is will U.S. allow China’s rise be peaceful, or force China to stop rising by war in any kind.
now, China is force to corner and no more choice.
Peaceful rise ?? lmao !!
Peacefully plundering Hong Kongers of their fundamental freedoms?
peacefully detaining millions Uyghur muslims of Xinjiang to detention centres?
peacefully suppressing the Tibetans, invading their land and destroying their culture?
peacefully bullying and preparing to invade Taiwan?
peacefully claiming the whole of south china sea and threatening all the nations in it?
peacefully attempting to invade India and killing their soldiers?
peacefully funding it's proxies to attack it's rivals, like North Korea to US, Pakistan to India, Arakans to Myanmar, etc. in order to achieve its ambitions?
peacefully building dams on most of the rivers that originate in Tibet, threatening the survival of several downstream nations?
peacefully buying stakes in other countries to influence their economy, interfere in their politics and forcing to be it's slave?
peacefully laying debt traps to smaller countries, taking over their territories making them succumb to despair?
peacefully launching cyber attacks on the nations that does not accept its terms?
peacefully stealing intellectual properties of other nations that constituted years of research and hard work?
peacefully allowing a pathogen to spread to the whole world by wilfully not letting out vital information which could have curbed the spread at its inception and also quite cynically, encouraging international travel but at the same time restricting domestic travel?
Peace is really relative isn't it? As a man from the free world, I do not want our future to be dominated by this 'peaceful' monster.
Sanātana Dharma lol a lot of word you said, so ignorant you are. Young Jedi, “the free world fighter”, you really need to travel more and see it with your own eyes before you make these statements instead of sitting in your home and learning it from Fox News, CNN or bbc. I barely trust any media, they only show you what they want you to know. I’m fortunately learned Chinese from my parents when I was kid so I can learn both side of story. All I’m saying is China is not as bad as you think, those statements you make is pretty biased but on some level they’re also partially correct. So you should keep digging, critical thinking and doing your own research. As an Asian American, I do hope China and America can work together leading the world to a bright future instead of another Cold War.
Btw don’t be so proud of free world. Try to understand their system instead simply call China CCP, communism or socialism. Their political system is more complicated than that. Both system has advantages and disadvantages. Both system made mistakes or wrong decisions. I won’t simply just saying one system is better than the other one. Only time time can prove it.
@@xuxiangzhang8773 It is not neccessary arguing with some irrational brainwashed ones.
Sariel Lasombra still worth a shot tho hehe
Looking at history we can draw conclusions. One is a country controlled by a party, and the other is a country controlled by capital group arms dealers and oil dealers. One country has never waged war abroad, and the other has waged war almost every year.
South Korea, Vietnam and Tibet?
@@davidlahaye1202 South Korea and Vietnam are totally different cases compare to Tibet. for South Korea and Vietnam is for defense reasons( both come from the results of America military imperialism), it was not purposely to invade other countries and harm their people because China wanted to, it had no choice. for Tibet, it's been china's territory since the Qing dynasty and it continued their relationship with the mainland in ROC's rule, their ties have never been broken so when KMT lost The Civil War, of course, PLA has the right to go into Tibet.
It was years ago here. Who has China played in the past 50 years? Who is provided with weapons? Every year when the United States starts a war, are there still few weapons that arms dealers secretly send to the war country?
@@lylehimself9287 Not the Qing Dynasty but earlier in the Yuan (or Mongolian) Dynasty when the then Dalai Lama sought the protection of China from its competing clan. The Lamas achieved such high influence in the Yuan court that it threatened the local population.
@@davidlahaye1202 Go back to school and learn the history
The world needs a lot more Erics, what a pleasure it is to listen to him
The question is more will America fall will be peaceful?
It shouldn't be "Will" question. China has been rising for 40 years and the rise IS peaceful.
Westerners reflect their history onto China.
Eric Li incredible reply in defense of China. He spoke with such clarity & informative at the same time. Jia you Mr Eric Li.
For some people, A weak and crippled China is what will ease the anxiety of the western world. People worry about China is ruled by one party government, then why do we think democracy as the only choice of political system is a good idea?
China is the most citizen democraty country. The so called "democraty" in the western is in reality a libertarian oligarchy on top of every law ne citizen.
If you look at how America choose its friends, it has nothing to do with democracy or authoritarian government. Saudi Arabia which is a monarchy is furthest from a democratic country that needs to be protected from its neighbours. Democracy is a weak, not strong, of government. It does promote long term planning, China strong growth for forty years was exactly the existence of long term planning with only the well-being of the people in mind. Let it change to a democratic society, it will weaken its structure and slow down it progress. And that is exactly what America want. Ask another question: why won’t the U.S. allow its states petitioning for secession allow them to leave the federation if it truly believes in democracy? Because it will weaken America.
It's like a one on ten debate!! That's fair??? Life is never fair.
Sure thing Eric can take on 1000 of them
A single candle light will eliminate thousand years of darkness..
The western intellectuals are stuck in their mindset that a great country means an aggressive country. That is certainly the case for many great powers including the US. But China is a different case. Over the last 1,500 years, China never aggressed any country; instead, it was the victim of many aggressions by the Kitans, then the Jurchens, the Mongols, the Manchus, the British, the French, the Americans, the Germans and the Japanese. Each of these aggressors invaded China, killed many Chinese, occupied part or even the whole of China, and, in the case of the Mongols and the Machus, pursued their aggressions and invasions beyond China to neighbouring countries, thus making China a bigger country. But invariably, all these aggressors, all these invaders were either absorbed by the Chinese (like the Kitans, the Jurchens, the Mongols and the Manchus) or they were kicked out of China (like the British, the French, the Germans, the Americans and the Japanese). Over these last 1,500 years, the size of China grew, not because China invaded other countries but because China was the victim of foreign aggression and the aggressors conquered other lands and added them to China before surrendering themselves to the Chinese. The people who contributed more to the enlargement of China were the Manchus and the Mongols. Not only they gifted China with their own country, but they also added other countries. It is fortunate for the Japanese that they did not conquer China and South East Asia in the 1930s and 1940s because, if they were successful, they would have ruled this vast empire that would comprise China, Japan, Korea and the whole South East Asia for maybe 300 to 400 years. But in the end thjey would have been absorbed by the Chinese and the Chinese would have governed this vast empire, including Japan itself. The Japanese, like the Mongols and the Manchus, would have become one of the ethnic minorities inside this vast China. It would be in the interest of the western countries to work in cooperation with China while keeping their own countries rather than trying to absorb China into their system. If the western countries try to absob China into their system, not only they will fail but they will even been absorbed into the superior Chinese system. That the Chinese system is superior to the western system in all ways can be seen if you compare their way of combating the pandemic. The western countries taken together (which has approximately the same population as China) have lost around one million people and their economy has contracted by around 6% in 2020. By contrast, China has lost less than 5,000 people and its economy grew by 2.3% in 2020.
Because Western only adopt WIN-LOSE principles, not WIN-WIN principles like China
During the pandemic this Chinese “single party society” shows enough about its effectiveness, efficiency and social solidarity to deal with any crisis. In contrary, western proud “democratic” societies are still in their chaos and malfunction status, death toll increases day and night.
do you mean Taiwan, Iceland, New Zealand and Australia?
@@joejxxx1169 four small island countries
@Mike Taiwan Province is not a small island country, Taiwan Province is an island of China.
The thing that bugs people like that last guy is the fact that China will not bend to rules that aren't based on mutual understanding and awareness. It does not see following established rules as a virtue in itself, which is why China is put so much effort into dialogue and negotiations. Unfortunately, rules are made by winners and they are not eager to change them to accommodate those who might challenge them. Who has been throwing dirt on all the international organizations and efforts recently, and even the very concept of free trade sometimes? It definitely hasn't been China.
*Wrong Question*
*The correct Question should read: Will US decline be peaceful, will US react peacefully if other nations don't trade with dollars, will US foment an Arab spring in Saudi Arabia if oil trade is done in Yuans*
Even with rule of law and international institution like UN security council, Iraq and other middle east nations still got invaded and sanctioned unilaterally. So, there's no guarantee that a super power will be reined using any ideology, multi parties, single party.
The best way forward is to keep strengthening international institutions so that super powers like the US or China or India could not act unilaterally towards other nations.
Where can you watch the full version of this discussion?
th-cam.com/video/1BZP1J_hzT0/w-d-xo.html
Just because the west conquer the world with fire and violence doesn’t necessarily mean the world will continue to do so...in fact so much of our fears worries and angers are from the unjust past, we should let go of that past it is important
1. What we learn from the history is we learn nothing from the history.
2. 1.4 billion of Chinese people have the right live in a good life, that will lead China to a number 1 power.
3. China has not invaded any other countries, but invaded by UK, USA, Japan, France, Germerny, Italy and so on.
4. The world is diversity, different people with different beliefs, with different culture and different history as well.
Why China's rise is peaceful as opposed to the West (Rome/Britain/American)? Because China and the West have different cultural and philosophical roots, as it was manifested in ZhenHe's Voyage to Africa as opposed to Columbus' Voyage to America. One conveys goodwill and friendship, of cause there were some unavoidable form of self-grandiosity. In comparison to ruthless killing and endless pillage, there is no question which one is more human.
As in the case of ROC/Taiwan, that's a totally different issue. That's an unfinished civil war, what's more, it was ROC who started it in 1946. So now ROC thinks it should not suffer the full consequences of its own action? So please don't frame it as Africans seek independence from the West, nor the settlers v.s. the natives picture. It's more like the Parliamentarians and Royalists in British civil war, fighting for the manner of China's governance. And it still waits to be resolved completely.
What is the situation now?
one quote from the core value of the Chinese culture - "兼愛，非攻”， hope this can be share to all people around the world.
even 100 years ago, the wisest scholar can't image the world we live now.
100 years is a long time
Peace.
This guy is brilliant
Is there a full version available?
They won't let you have that full version of it.😏
The Guan Video channel here gets the authorization from nexus. Here's the full version of the conference. th-cam.com/video/nZ2DDFSDfTQ/w-d-xo.html
Chinese history doesn’t have an example of aggressive expansionism beyond their natural realm and influential parameters! You don’t see Chinese voyages to colonize else where but you do see it in the West! So when that European guy says why would you be different he is filtering it through his own history and his cultural perspective because his ppl would venture out and impose power if they could but for a Chinese wise person its a fool’s errand just because of the fact it can’t be sustained in the long run and it can also have blow back in the distant future just the kind of “reverse colonization” Europe is experiencing right now!
During Mr. Barroso tenure, I cannot recall that Europe made any 'spectacular advance,' all was mediocre and foggy, as the serf and vassal chains have been restricting Europe in all directions. Man was entrusted to lead EU, but to recollection of all, there is no mark of his leadership one would quote now.
Excellent program! Thanks.
These conversations are too important to be kept behind a paywall..
It depends on what empire refers to in each empire’s view. If the empire’s agenda is to dominate others and get others to donate to it, then yes, that is a dangerous empire. But it is one bent on just improving the livelihood of its own people and there are so many ways of doing it other than attacking and dominating others, then yes that empire is dangerous. Japan was bent on expanding its territory because it is a land exploited to the full and neighboring lands look ripe for the picking. Similarly, in Europe, domination looked like the only way it could gather greater wealth by getting others to contribute to it. Even the US set up NATO to dominate Europe so that Europe has to subject to US wishes. Similarly, for Japan and S Korea, there are these “mutual” security treaties to bind them to US control. The forced signing of the Plaza Accord for both Japan and Europe showed how much both these territories are being dominated by bigger powers. China, on the other hand, does not need this to move ahead as there is a lot of room to grow. All they need is free trade and markets for their products and similarly they can also offer their markets to the best products there are from this world.
Non of All previous western empires are good. They are all evil. They invaded, regimes changed, looting and colonized all the invaded country. Now that China has risen, many countries around the world began to prosper and begin to condemn the West one after another.
Well articulated on China behalf. History shows. Let's get it together.
amazing peaceful raise
Ans: No!
Why?
US: We won't let you.
Most Westerners do not understand Chinese thinking. If they can understand the introspection, diligence and family feelings in Chinese culture, they will have the soil to understand this problem.
My answer is that China's rise requires world stability, or at least regional peace.
The Chinese market is big and complex enough that China is not keen on and does not need to engage in war and colonization.
China is a nation that promote collaboration, China never intend to invade any country.
Because China knows it gains more when others are helped in development. But it also means that it becomes less dependent on the markets of the developed countries which poses a threat to these countries.
Can't agree with him any more!!
It won’t be peaceful if u don’t stop poking it in d eyes. 😂🤣😂🤣
Just ask aussie and please ask them to stop poking the dragon's tail.
Roasted
I don’t know how old Eric Li is but in my lifetime China has invaded Vietnam, seized territorial waters belonging to Indonesia and the Philippines, fought border wars with India, and massacred its own people in Tiananmen Square. In the decade before I was born they invaded Tibet and sent their soldiers to intervene in the Korean War to save an ally that had attacked South Korea and was losing.
Amidst all that we have the perennial threats against Taiwan.
Now, perhaps Mr. Li was not taught the full breath of history at school. That does not excuse him from learning as an adult.
SG is a single party state..
I like Eric li.
' get back to self determination '? ?? What kind of fantasy world history is this?
What that guy want is that future is determined and could not be changed. Future is unknown, and future is shaped by the past and the current. One hard rule is sociality work on reciprocity and not on man-made rule, it works on heart-to-heart feeling. That is the old man should have known at his age. Suppression, bully, cold treatment, and isolation is definitely not something that can protect them, they only can harm themselves.
as a chinese , i almost can assert that china's rise would not be aggressive. My motherland always treats people from other countries as guests and meanwhile treat chinese people as "shiiiiit" (in westerners' views). there is a very precise word "内卷" that can express it.
A.G.I Will be man's last invention
China's rise will be peaceful, because there isn't any precedent for Chinese militaristic threat or invasion outside of its borders. Mr. Li is absolutely right. Every empire's rise in history has been brought about through militarism, colonialism and bloodshed. The rise of the west and the colonization of the Americas (As was Africa) was brought about through colonialism, subjugation of aboriginals, cultural destruction/assimilation of conquered cultures and wholesale slaughter at some junctures. For some time, this sort of engagement was seen by hegemonic powers as necessary for territorial expansionism and opening of markets for trade.
Your multiparty world is unfamiliar to the rest of the world where there is stability.
Jesus was born in Asia. He lived in Asia and died in Asia. So Jesus is Asian. Because Jesus is God himself, so God is also Asian. God created the universe from the Foundation Stone, located in the Doom of the Rock, in Jerusalem, Asia. Jesus was crucified on Good Friday and resurrected on the following Sunday, just as Asia was suppressed in the last few centuries, and rising again today.
Right but Mao worst than Hitler
It's not true!
The new conquest in the 21st century isn't through military and armies. It is through economics. And China has been quite aggressive about expanding its' economic influence into other continents. Through its' Belt and Road Initiative and New Silk Road. China is developing countries and then demanding repayment with the local assets of those countries. Look at the ports in Sri Lanka for example.
This is not a new tactic by any means. The United States has been doing this in Latin America for nearly a century. The only thing new about it is the scale.
You can expand your Influences by Economic Means, but to Conquer and subjugate other Countries and Peoples, you can only do it by Military Means.
And your point is?
Doesn’t Eric Li consider the invasion of Africa by Chinese propaganda to be just as bad as the invasion of Africa by other empires?
mubarak, are you referring to China’s belt & initatives with african countries? if yes, then do you think the bank is debt trapping you when they approve your mortgage when you buy a house?
The interesting fact is that China cancels some of these countries' debt every three years. And China helps them build infrastructure, which the West does not
Invasion requires military. Doing business is not an invasion. Especially if the host country agrees !
If you don’t borrow loan from China and let China build it at half or even one third the price, do you think that the World Bank can do better? It will force them to take a larger loan and also tie them up to change their form of government or impose austerity measures that only help the World Bank recovers its money but doesn’t get the recipient country to get out of being under-developed.