原创翻译:龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.com 翻译:Peng_Hanwell 转载请注明出处

China and the Clash of Civilizations


To recap briefly, after the collapse of most communist states in 1990, the world appeared to have entered a period of permanent peace. Stanford University-based political scientist Francis Fukuyama called it "the end of history," in which democracy and free-market capitalism would become the final form of human government. In response to Fukuyama's 1992 book, Harvard political scientist Samuel Huntington penned an article entitled "The Clash of Civilizations?," which he expanded into a 1996 book entitled The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. Huntington argued that now that the age of ideological conflict between communism and capitalism had ended, civilizational conflict, the normal state of affairs in the world, would reassert itself. His book concentrated on the "bloody borders" between Islamic and non-Islamic communities.




法兰西斯·福山(Francis Fukuyama)生于1952年10月27日,日裔美籍学者。哈佛大学政治学博士,现任约翰霍普金斯大学、保罗·尼采高级国际问题研究院、舒华兹讲座、国际政治经济学教授,曾师从塞缪尔·亨廷顿。曾任美国国务院思想库政策企划局副局长。著有《历史之终结与最后一人》、《后人类未来──基因工程的人性浩劫》、《跨越断层──人性与社会秩序重建》、《信任》、《政治秩序的起源:从前人类时代到法国大革命》。他的第一本著作《历史之终结与最后一人》让他一举成名。

塞缪尔·亨廷顿(1927.4.18--2008.12.24),英文名Samuel P. Huntington,美国当代著名的国际政治理论家。早年就读于耶鲁大学、芝加哥大学和哈佛大学,1951 年23岁时即获哈佛大学博士学位,并留校任教长达58年,并先后在美国政府许多部门担任过公职或充当顾问。曾任哈佛大学阿尔伯特·魏斯赫德三世学院教授,哈佛国际和地区问题研究所所长,约翰·奥林战略研究所主任。曾任卡特政府国家安全计划顾问,《外交政策》杂志发言人与主编之一,是《文明的冲突与世界秩序的重建》一书的作者。

Huntington recognized nine civilizations, and as per his prediction, two of those civilizations are trying to impose themselves on the rest of the world. Islamic civilization got off to an early start with the World Trade Center bombing in 1993, following that attack up with demolition of the structure in 2001. But the Islamic effort will pale into insignificance compared to what China has in store. Countries that don't want to be dominated by China are at last organizing in response to that threat.


Using Huntington's cultural divisions as a template, the world can be divided into three camps: the anti-China camp, the indifferent, and China. This graphic shows each group relative to the size of their economies:


The coming war with China will mark the end of globalism. In preparation for that war, the anti-China forces will attempt to shrink the Chinese economy using trade restrictions, starting with the Trump administration's effort to reduce the U.S. trade deficit with China. The front-line states in East Asia of Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan realize the necessity of this. The traditional European naval powers of the U.K. and France also realize that China must be contained. Both countries have announced that they will be conducting freedom of navigation exercises in the South China Sea.


If China attacks these patrols, there is a high probability that the E.U. will retaliate by restricting China's access to the E.U. market.

What is motivating the Europeans in this instance is that if China is successful in seizing the South China Sea, then every other body of water on the planet will be fair game, starting with parts of the Mediterranean.


Like the Muslims, the Europeans have been attempting some Kulturkampf on the rest of the planet, even as the E.U. is disintegrating at the margins. Global warming is the state religion of the E.U., and its principals have threatened trade imposts on countries that don't toe the line.

像MSL一样,欧洲人一直在尝试在世界其它地方进行“文化斗争”,即使欧盟在瓦解的边缘的时候也没有变过。 全球变暖是欧盟的国教,其它主要纲领就是对不盲从的国家征收关税。


The Europeans are also realizing that they have been played by China. European companies came in to build factories and establish themselves in that once booming economy. Now that those efforts are successful, China is effectively expropriating ownership. For example, the Danish shipping company Maersk has 25% of its assets in China and at its peak had 1,100 expatriates in China to run the operation. The Chinese government hasn't renewed visas for almost all of them. There are now only two Maersk expatriates in China, and the company has lost control of 25% of its asset base. Other European companies have been fined for being too successful against their Chinese competitors. China is also hobbling its own economy with the move back to state-owned enterprises, which have one third of the productivity of privately owned companies.


China continues to attempt to chew away at India's territory in the Himalayas. In response, India is attempting to help stiffen the resolve of front-line states Vietnam and Indonesia for the coming conflict.


The indifferent grouping is like China in that its members are mostly dictatorships with plenty of corruption and not much in the way of rule of law. The latter two factors hobble productivity. For example, the mystery of why Russia's economy is not much larger than Australia's is answered in corruption causing costs to be three times higher than they should be.

Being amoral, these countries will happily continue to trade with China, no matter how many deaths the Chinese cause.


At the same time, Chinese behavior has not won the Middle Kingdom any friends. Once it is clear that China is losing the war that it will start, there will be a strong temptation to throw their lot in with the Allied side and declare war on China because it will be the excuse to expropriate Chinese-owned assets.


What of China itself? We won't be fighting all 1,300 million of them, just the 330 million or so in the coastal provinces that have had the economic growth of the last 20 years.

We don't have to have a land war with them – Vietnam is down for that role. All we have to do is sink all their ships and seize their artificial islands in the South China Sea. And then wait them out. The world will find that it can get along without China – quite happily.