He is right about it, China has done somethings extremely well! Even if they had an advantage of a totalitarian govt. their growth is exceptional.
Of course we can't copy them as our geopolitical scenario is way too different, but we can certainly learn the things they did right, even if we have to achieve the same goals differently!
If the West is serious about protecting its long-term interests, it must give emerging powers a stake in global system. No way can 12% of world population continue to control destiny of remaining 88%. This would involve overhaul of existing multilateral institutions such as IMF and Security Council (SC) as well as formation of new institutions with emerging power participation. (eg. SC members are WW2 victors while an Asian cannot lead IMF despite massive Asian forex reserves.)
Mahbubani is correct in asserting that the West does not understand Asian notion of "freedom". For most Asians "freedom" is not about voting, but about making personal choices. (No offense to Indians who are justifiably proud to be part of the world's largest democracy). Similarly, after 9/11, Western policy of exporting freedom is beginning to sound hollow - even hypocritical - due to massive violations of civil liberties of its own citizens. The West has failed its own test.
The West is also guilty of serious mistakes in Iraq. In fact, it appears to have forgotten its own lessons from WW2. The US did not put Japanese emperor on trial in 1945 in order to ensure social stability by preserving a key institution. In Iraq, on the other hand, it arrogantly engaged in de-Baathification that decimated the middle-class, the glue that holds a society together. By contrast, Japanese allowed British colonial officers to continue during occupation of Singapore.
I agree with explanation of Western decline and description of its recent failures. Current Western generation is used to being at the top and has lost sense of the "struggle" that marked Western ascent; it only prefers to lecture others. Similarly, the West misjudged its success against Soviet Union as a triumph of its political system. In reality, success was due to its economic system. China correctly focused on its economy while Russia foolishly focused on political system.
It is interesting to hear Mahbubani correct two popular misconceptions: (a) "Europe's past is Asia's future", and (b) "China's rise is a threat to its neighbors." Asians have studied European history and will avoid war at all costs; SE Asia is already moving in direction of EU federation. Similarly, China has made a policy to "export its prosperity" to neighbors via free trade agreements. This marks an exception to historical rule of tensions accompanying rise of a new power.
I fully agree that is very difficult for Westerners to appreciate the change in psyche of Asians from ongoing economic transformation. Tradition held that "birth was destiny"; hence people accepted their circumstances and rarely took initiative to improve their lot. This was especially true in India because of the ancient caste system. Globalization - and ensuring economic growth - has now "awoken" people to grab opportunity and make financial and social strides via education.
Asia's success with technology acquisition and middle class generation has been phenomenal: (a) 85-90% of science PhDs are held by Asians. China, India, Korea, and Taiwan together account for more than 50% of PhDs awarded by US universities every year; (b) Asian share of global tech exports has risen from 7% in 1980 to 25% in 2001. (US share fell from 31% to 18%); (c) tens of millions have been lifted out of poverty. In China alone 300 million will be in middle class by 2030.
@KashifHKhan Isn't there already well over 300 million Chinese middle class? I think you misheard. If I'm not mistaken, he mentioned that by 2030, there will be 300 million more Chinese middle class than Americans. Which should put it at around 700 million. A 300 million-strong middle class was already reached a few years back.
I agree: (a) 21st century marks the end of the era of Western domination and beginning of rise of Asia. By 2050 three out of four top economies will be in Asia; (b) Asia's rise is a "return to norm". For 1800 years up to the Industrial Revolution, India and China were the largest global economies; (c) Asia is being "smart" by replicating West's best practices - middle class generation and technology focus. The former creates social stability while latter regenerates economy.
He is right about it, China has done somethings extremely well! Even if they had an advantage of a totalitarian govt. their growth is exceptional.
Of course we can't copy them as our geopolitical scenario is way too different, but we can certainly learn the things they did right, even if we have to achieve the same goals differently!
TheBigFatDude 2 years ago
if they contain goodness, and live with meaning in whatever they are doing; only then will their success last.
rzuhler 2 years ago
ITS THE BEGINNING OF THE GOLDEN AGE.
MUURCHOTI 2 years ago
PART 8:
If the West is serious about protecting its long-term interests, it must give emerging powers a stake in global system. No way can 12% of world population continue to control destiny of remaining 88%. This would involve overhaul of existing multilateral institutions such as IMF and Security Council (SC) as well as formation of new institutions with emerging power participation. (eg. SC members are WW2 victors while an Asian cannot lead IMF despite massive Asian forex reserves.)
-Kashif
KashifHKhan 2 years ago
PART 7:
Mahbubani is correct in asserting that the West does not understand Asian notion of "freedom". For most Asians "freedom" is not about voting, but about making personal choices. (No offense to Indians who are justifiably proud to be part of the world's largest democracy). Similarly, after 9/11, Western policy of exporting freedom is beginning to sound hollow - even hypocritical - due to massive violations of civil liberties of its own citizens. The West has failed its own test.
-Kashif
KashifHKhan 2 years ago
PART 6:
The West is also guilty of serious mistakes in Iraq. In fact, it appears to have forgotten its own lessons from WW2. The US did not put Japanese emperor on trial in 1945 in order to ensure social stability by preserving a key institution. In Iraq, on the other hand, it arrogantly engaged in de-Baathification that decimated the middle-class, the glue that holds a society together. By contrast, Japanese allowed British colonial officers to continue during occupation of Singapore.
-Kashif
KashifHKhan 2 years ago
PART 5:
I agree with explanation of Western decline and description of its recent failures. Current Western generation is used to being at the top and has lost sense of the "struggle" that marked Western ascent; it only prefers to lecture others. Similarly, the West misjudged its success against Soviet Union as a triumph of its political system. In reality, success was due to its economic system. China correctly focused on its economy while Russia foolishly focused on political system.
-Kashif
KashifHKhan 2 years ago
PART 4:
It is interesting to hear Mahbubani correct two popular misconceptions: (a) "Europe's past is Asia's future", and (b) "China's rise is a threat to its neighbors." Asians have studied European history and will avoid war at all costs; SE Asia is already moving in direction of EU federation. Similarly, China has made a policy to "export its prosperity" to neighbors via free trade agreements. This marks an exception to historical rule of tensions accompanying rise of a new power.
-Kashif
KashifHKhan 2 years ago
PART 3:
I fully agree that is very difficult for Westerners to appreciate the change in psyche of Asians from ongoing economic transformation. Tradition held that "birth was destiny"; hence people accepted their circumstances and rarely took initiative to improve their lot. This was especially true in India because of the ancient caste system. Globalization - and ensuring economic growth - has now "awoken" people to grab opportunity and make financial and social strides via education.
-Kashif
KashifHKhan 2 years ago
PART 2:
Asia's success with technology acquisition and middle class generation has been phenomenal: (a) 85-90% of science PhDs are held by Asians. China, India, Korea, and Taiwan together account for more than 50% of PhDs awarded by US universities every year; (b) Asian share of global tech exports has risen from 7% in 1980 to 25% in 2001. (US share fell from 31% to 18%); (c) tens of millions have been lifted out of poverty. In China alone 300 million will be in middle class by 2030.
-Kashif
KashifHKhan 2 years ago
@KashifHKhan Isn't there already well over 300 million Chinese middle class? I think you misheard. If I'm not mistaken, he mentioned that by 2030, there will be 300 million more Chinese middle class than Americans. Which should put it at around 700 million. A 300 million-strong middle class was already reached a few years back.
RoniCMaster 1 year ago
PART 1:
I agree: (a) 21st century marks the end of the era of Western domination and beginning of rise of Asia. By 2050 three out of four top economies will be in Asia; (b) Asia's rise is a "return to norm". For 1800 years up to the Industrial Revolution, India and China were the largest global economies; (c) Asia is being "smart" by replicating West's best practices - middle class generation and technology focus. The former creates social stability while latter regenerates economy.
-Kashif
KashifHKhan 2 years ago