China’s judgment is sound in trying to rally non-Western nations towards imposed values
By Timur Fomenko, a political analyst
“China’s newest try to rally the world towards Western values,” reads a headline in The Economist, an outlet which is well-known for its Anglo-capitalist outlook.
The article begins by citing Samuel Huntington’s “conflict of civilizations” thesis, which argues {that a} conflict between East and West would outline the post-Chilly Warfare future as a type of cultural and spiritual identification battle. In presenting this theme, the article then dives into what Xi Jinping has touted as his ‘international civilization initiative’ based mostly on the premise that “civilizations can dwell in concord.” The catch, as interpreted by The Economist, is that the “West should cease selling its values, or Huntington can be confirmed proper.”
Arguably, the world has been in a cultural battle for some time now, and it didn’t begin with US-China competitors. The rise and surge of political Islam, in any case, pursuing hard-line interpretations of Sharia legislation, and even going so far as terrorism and insurgency, was a response to Westernization within the Center East, an try to try to implement an Islamic identification towards it. To some extent, the Warfare on Terror was a ‘conflict of civilizations’ as a lot because it was a conflict of ideologies and cultural identities which noticed one another as mutually existential threats.
For the previous 400 years or so, Western nations have dominated the world. European empires, in addition to america, subjugated nations and constructed colonial states throughout the globe. This was accomplished primarily for financial causes, permitting these international locations to counterpoint themselves on the expense of colonies and creating huge industrial empires which have been enforced by army energy. Such imperialists framed themselves as benevolent guardians who represented a better type of civilization and values which they have been “bringing” to the colonized. Thus, as they unfold their empires all through Africa, Latin America, the Indian subcontinent, Asia, and elsewhere. Westerners additionally sought to broaden their ideology and worth techniques.
It’s due to this that “Westernization” and “globalization” have successfully meant the identical factor, because the empires of outdated have been those that introduced the world collectively by the financial and buying and selling system they created. However beginning within the twentieth century, lots of the international locations which have been colonized by the West began to withstand their oppressors, and actions for independence and liberation surged. One such motion, after all, was the rise of the Communist Social gathering in China led by Mao Zedong, and each motion he impressed.
Whereas the US triumphed within the unique Chilly Warfare and ushered in a brand new wave of globalization, styled as Pax-Americana, that period has now come to an finish. It is because the world has modified, particularly by the emergence of China as a world energy. The idea of “globalization” has shifted from being a West-dominated phenomenon, now not synonymous with “Westernization,” to a extra various one during which the US and collective West understand they now not management. In different phrases, “globalization” is now not a one-way highway whereby the West imposes its values unilaterally on the remainder of the world together with financial dominance. International locations akin to China, as seen by packages such because the Belt and Street Initiative, are in a position to profit from it too.
That is the place the brand new “conflict of civilizations” is available in, exactly as a result of China has gained the power to problem the West’s imaginative and prescient for the world on a scale by no means seen earlier than, and even surpassing that of the previous Soviet Union. Up to date China frames itself as a mannequin inside a multipolar order, searching for to reject the Western-centric model which has dominated the world for hundreds of years and allowed these international locations to use and alter others. In doing so, China refuses “Westernization” and positions itself as its personal “civilizational pole.”
After all, it’s not alone, and Beijing finds assist from many countries which have equally been “internet losers” and topic to colonialism, and who all search a fairer worldwide system. For instance, this has nice enchantment to international locations in Africa, the Center East, Latin America, South Asia and, after all, Russia. Many of those international locations see the onslaught of Western values not solely as historic threats to their nationwide sovereignty, but in addition to their very own cultural identification. Why, for instance, is a rustic such because the United Arab Emirates, a conventional Western associate, now so pro-China? As a extremely conservative Arab state, it views the pursuit of Western liberalism as a risk to its personal Islamic values, and sees assist in a Chinese language state which, even espousing a unique ideology, encourages plurality and respect for various civilizations versus Western evangelism.
Aside from very subservient international locations akin to Japan, the remainder of the world has by no means wished to be dominated by the West. That doesn’t imply they’re hostile to the West, however it does symbolize a longing to be handled as equal and to exist on their very own phrases versus being on the backside of an financial and worth hierarchy which solely advantages a small group of nations. As such, the brand new Chilly Warfare may very a lot be constructed on a “conflict of civilizations,” as a result of it’s Western liberalism up towards those that elect to not dwell by its premises.
The statements, views and opinions expressed on this column are solely these of the writer and don’t essentially symbolize these of RT.
You’ll be able to share this story on social media:
Supply hyperlink
