I have recently perused Nicholas Kristof’s NYT piece “China’s Man in Washington, Named Trump”(https://nyti.ms/3h2JXh8). One paragraph in particular caught my attention: “A joke in China suggests that Trump’s Chinese name is Chuan Jianguo, or “Build-the-Country Trump.” That’s because Build-the-Country is a common revolutionary name among Communist patriots, and it’s mockingly suggested that Trump’s misrule of the United States is actually bolstering Xi’s regime.”
Kristoff also avows that since Trump’s ascension to presidency, the American nation became highly polarized. This is reflected in the current administration’s policies on climate change, foreign relations with established U.S. allies, and COVID-19 prevention, all of which are rather ineffective. It also seems like Mr. Trump and his team diverged from the traditional priorities, including promoting free trade, human rights, and other quintessentially American values. As described thoroughly by John Bolton, all these factors contributed to the declining standing of the U.S. in global politics.
What is more, many people fall prey to CCP’s propaganda and its interpretations of Trump’s actions, which only enhances China’s reputation.
But that might not exactly be the case.
The CCP apparently failed to utilize the window of opportunity created by the ineptness of the Trump administration, as China could have grown to the position of a leader by filling in the void left by the U.S.
During the 2016 APEC Ministerial Meeting in Lima, Peru, Xi Jinping and his team actively supported the plans to establish the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) and a Free Trade Area of the Asia Pacific, or FTAAP. In contrast, the United States withdrew its signature from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) in early 2017. Coupled with China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the establishment of the Asian Infrastructure and Investment Bank (AIIB), this move bolstered China’s capacity to influence global investments and trade, high-tech mergers and acquisitions, and, overall, expand its geostrategic influence on the entire globe.
At the same time, various propaganda films about great power competition, military industry, and science and technology surged all at once, and gained remarkable following around the world.
All this provided a window of opportunity for the CCP to slowly change its course. Around the same time, the distrust for POTUS among U.S. allies’ reached its apex. According to polls conducted by the Pew Research Center, the distrust for the U.S. president in the U.K. reached 75%, 72% in Japan, 70% in Australia, and stunning 86% in France.
Had the C.C.P,. begun to open up at that time, or at least resumed the governance style of the Hu-Wen administration, it could have reaped the benefits of promoting liberalism where the U.S. failed to deliver. It was the time for Beijing to gradually enhance freedom of speech domestically, pursue sustainable infrastructural projects, gradually reform unfair barriers to trade, transform its S.O.E.s, strengthen protections for private ownership, and vitalize its start-ups and enterprises.
Moreover, were China to cease the genocide in East Turkestan and refrain from cracking down on Hong Kong's semi-autonomy, it would have greatly enhanced its global international image. Additionally, if paired with slow but steady reforms, Beijing’s respect for sovereignty of its peoples would have attracted a large amount of foreign investment, which in turn would have continued to buttress the country’s growth.
It is China prerogative to remain idle.
It might still be possible for Chinese “Dream” to come true.
Yet, a historic window of opportunity is now closed.
Xi assumed the tools of proscribing and stalling, which are completely antithetical to the aforementioned window of opportunity.
Today, China is more authoritarian, less flexible, and fully deprived of horizontal accountability. Its reliance on wolf warrior diplomacy backfired: for example, the Swedish parliament sought to expel the Chinese ambassador to Stockholm. Also, Prague, the capital of Czechia, terminated its sister-city agreement with Shanghai and instead signed a new one with Taipei. Last but not least, we ought not to forget about the recent fiasco in the relations with the United States who ordered the shutdown of China’s consulate in Houston. All of this took its toll on China’s reputation.
Its international standing and inability to replace the U.S. as the major global power are not the only issues China is currently facing.
As it experiences multiple domestic and international shocks, China struggles to combat the COVID-19 pandemic and tame the disastrous floods of Yangtze River. The swarm of locusts of biblical proportions is also crippling Beijing’s institutional capacity and may soon lead to food shortages. In fact, the precarity of food supply further diminishes the level of trust for Chinese authorities.
In 2019, the Pew Research Center conducted a public opinion survey to examine the international views of China. In the U.S., Argentina, the U.K., Canada, Germany, and Ukraine, only about 30% of respondents claim a favorable view of China.
As the COVID-19 pandemic rages in the U.S., as many as 73% of U.S. respondents view China unfavorably.
Recently, the C.C.P. is losing its focus by continuously shifting targets. In fact, I believe there is no need for the C.C.P.to rely on nationalistic appeals, since in this new century values, business relations, and fair competition are all far more important than greater than delusive blood ties.
China lies only 130 kilometers away from us. Of course, we welcome dialogue and seek to avoid misjudgments. But we also distinguish between the C.C.P. and China. While we do welcome dialogue, but we will not be coerced to talk under unjust preconditions or in fear.
The only fair prerequisites are those of reciprocity, mutual respect as well as fairness and openness with respect for the rule of law.
Source: Pew Research Center
最近看到紐約時報中文版的一篇文章
<美國的川普,中國的「川建國」>,其中一小段是這樣的
「在中國,人們戲稱川普的中文名字是川建國。那是因為建國是共產黨愛國者中一個普遍的革命人名。它在諷刺地暗示川普對美國的治理不當實際上是在鞏固習近平的政權。」
裡面也提到,川普在任的幾年,國家更分裂,對於氣候變遷,傳統美國盟友,乃至於疫情處理等都相當拙劣,對於美國傳統的自由貿易、人權等價值也基本上都沒有太大興趣。這些方針,導致美國在世界的評價降低,波頓的新書也多有描述。
除此之外,許多不幸相信中共宣傳,又或者是中共圈養的小粉紅,特別故意愛宣傳川普增強中國的威望。
但這不是真的。
中共完全沒有掌握美國做得不夠好的地方,去增強其在世界的領導力。
在2016年時,秘魯的亞太峰會舉行期間,習近平政權爭取(RCEP)及亞太自由貿易區(FTAAP)談判;對比2017年初,美國剛宣布退出TPP,加上中國到「一帶一路」和亞洲基礎設施投資銀行,中國當時在世界全面發揮投資貿易、高科技併購還有其地緣戰略的影響力。
也是那個時候,各種的大國崛起、大國軍工、大國科技的宣傳影片此起彼落,似乎正準備要在世界舞台發光發熱。
這曾經是中共慢慢轉向的一個機會之窗。彼時(2017)美國盟友對美國總統的不信任度達到歷史新高,根據皮尤研究中心的資訊,英國對於美國總統的不信任度達到75%、日本72% 澳洲70% 法國更高達86%
如果那時中共開始有限度的改革,對內放寬言論自由,或者至少維持在胡溫當時的水中,對外追求有責任的基礎建設,逐步緩慢減低不公平的貿易壁壘,對於國有企業改革,增強私營企業、新創企業的活力。
停止對新疆迫害,不干預香港自治,不僅國際形象會大幅改善,哪怕是緩慢但是穩健的改革,也會讓大量吸引外資,讓中國的活力持續前進。
哪怕是什麼都不做也好
那或許有這麽一點可能性,中國「夢」是可以前行的
但是歷史機緣的大門已經關上。
習、禁、停、放棄了這個機會之窗,徹底的走向相反的方向。
更專制、更沒有彈性,更沒有任何制衡的力量。各種戰狼外交,讓瑞典議員提案驅逐中國大使,捷克布拉格市長與台北簽訂姊妹是,就解散上海與該市關係、被美國關閉領事館、各種讓中國形象低下的事情,中共都沒有少做。
中共不但完全沒有辦法取代美國,在多重國內外的衝擊之下,又是瘟疫,又是超大水患,緊接著蝗害,還有進來的糧食不足問題,正在面臨巨大的瓶頸。
而糧食的命脈,卻恰恰又在對他最不信任,對中共價值最反對的國家聯盟
根據皮尤研究中心:Pew Research Center2019調查各國對中國的喜好度,美國、阿根廷、英國、加拿大、德國、烏克蘭等,對於中國的喜好度都在30%上下
而2020疫情後美國對於中國的不信任度,更高達73%。
最近中共在演習,又要玩轉移目標的手段,對於中共,其實不必再有民族主義的同情,因為新的世紀,價值、商業模式、公平競爭的制度大於血緣幻想。
中國離我們只有130公里的距離,我們當然歡迎對話,避免誤判。但我們同時也區分中共與中國,歡迎對話,但不在前提、條件、恐懼之下對話。
如果真的要有前提,那就是對等、尊重,還有公平公開法治的方式會晤。
資料來源:皮尤研究中心:Pew Research Center
(美國著名的民調機構和智庫機構,https://www.pewresearch.org/)
coupled中文 在 讀書e誌 Facebook 的最佳貼文
***** Geek Series 3-2*****
為什麼 E=mc2?
想挑戰稍難到科普書籍,可以考慮這本有中文版的 “白話相對論”
作者是一位搖滾歌手後來成為物理學教授的有趣人物。他儼然是英國科普的代言人 (有點類似美國的 Neil deGrasse Tyson),在電視節目和 Youtube 上常常用平易近人的方式說明一般認知非常艱深的科學。書本從我們對時間空間的一般認知開始聊起,一直答應讀者不會有太困難的數學。,原來畢氏定理 (直角三角形兩邊各自平方總和,等於斜邊的平方),加上簡單的國中牛頓運動定律,以及對一些非常細微的差異一步一步追根究柢,是愛因斯坦想出相對論的方式!沒有高科技工具,當時他還在專利局工作,平淡的工作時間讓他有餘裕奔放思考想像這些問題。
這裡就不細談他推導的過程,其實如果看過電影 “Interstellar" (“星際效應”)大概就可以看見在不同速度和不同引力時,空間的變化和時間相對的快慢 (幾點電影裡的太空人爸爸後來看到年老的女兒科學家?)。我到心得有二:
首先,還是對自然和宇宙,作者描繪出的科學精神是一種謙卑,是深深知道我們的渺小和有限 (參考去年這一本書 “Ignorance", 深入講解無知在科學探索的重要性)。在這個謙卑裡面,對事物的細微觀察,加上鍥而不捨的思考和不受框架的想像,成就了許多偉大的發現。
但同時,愛因斯坦發表相對論的100年前,他的實驗工具很受限,卻在地球上這麼受限的環境中產生出對宇宙一個皆然不同於過去數千年的認知。在幾年後,這些理論用在數萬光年之外的黑洞,白矮星,脈衝星,準確地預測了它們的行為。而現在蓬勃發展的量子科學,也吸引許多科學家挑戰愛因斯坦的時空觀!或許謙卑的心態才能開啟新發現的契機,而許多宇宙的奧秘,也默默地隱藏在地球上許多細微之處,等待著我們揭開並欣賞它們以數學形態展現出來的美感。
“Science at its best is driven by inquiring minds afforded the freedom to dream, coupled with the technical ability and discipline to think.
"科學的極致是一個求知的心有想像的自由,同時有技術能力和思考的紀律”
中文版鏈結和相關書籍在部落格中
https://dushuyizhi.net/why-does-emc2-%e7%9c%8b%e6%87%82%e8%b3%aa%e8%83%bd%e4%ba%92%e6%8f%9b%e8%88%87%e7%9b%b8%e5%b0%8d%e8%ab%96%e7%9a%84%e7%ac%ac%e4%b8%80%e6%9c%ac%e6%9b%b8/
coupled中文 在 讀書e誌 Facebook 的最佳貼文
從大自然思考組織經營,2之2。讀起來很花力氣,但應該會入選我2019的top 10
<哥吉拉II: 怪獸之王> 要上映之際,分享這個有點應景!
上一部 “哥吉拉”電影出來時,記者打趣地詢問知名科學家的作者有什麼看法?作者一本正經地回答它不可能存在,因為一隻蜥蜴照著比例放大到100公尺高,它等比例的重量是等比例的骨架所無法撐起來的,更遑論在市區走來走去搞破壞!作者的研究指出,每一個物種都有它體積的上限和壽命的上限,而且跟心跳,跟大腦灰質,以及該動物的新陳代謝率都是巧妙地線性相關的。(也就說明了為什麼不會有科幻電影中的突變的巨大昆蟲)
作者是一名物理學家。當學界開始有“廿一世紀是生物學的世紀”的說法時,他非常不服氣。適逢他當時生病,於是開始研究人類的壽命跟各種因素的關聯性,因而發現體積(物理)與壽命(動物的心跳和代謝)的關聯。原來生物的多樣性中,竟然都遵守某些最簡單的定律。而不簡單的,反而是 Complex Adaptive Systems (例如,城市,社群,生態圈,等等),才能隨著環境變異而不斷演變。
我選這本書是因為他試著回答我一直在思考的一個問題:同樣是人為組織,為什麼企業不能像城市一般用續存留?當然,歷史中也有沒落或是消失的城市,但世界上許多大城市都有百年甚至千年的歷史,甚至歷經浩劫都還能存活。作者研究公司的“新陳代謝率“(產出與花費的比例),發現它的線性關係竟然跟動物的比例很類似,也就是說幾乎可以計算出它的“壽命”。但是城市因為更加去中心化,不是top down,更加多元,也不受利潤最大化作為最高原則而得以自由創新,反而得以長久進化以及延續。
這就跟我上一本書提到,從生態環境如何學習永續的秘密:多元,分散管理,保有餘裕(不完全被效率最優化所驅動),以及社群價值。我相信很多聰明的企業家和管理者都清楚這一點,但限於現代的公司法和投資人的預期,似乎很難逃脫被要求一直快速成長並優化效率的命運。(反而少數百年公司,特別是日本或是歐洲的,都是小型組織,專注於某個非常專精的領域,年年獲利平穩而沒有大幅變動。作者指出,隨著各產業必須資訊化,這些公司能否延續下去是個重大考驗)
“Most companies tend to be short sighted, conservative, and not very supportive of innovation or risky ideas.....consequently, they tend towards becoming more and more uni-dimentional. This reduction in diversity coupled with the predicament in which companies sit near a critical point is a classic indicator of reduces resilience"
最後,作者拋出來的議題是,因著城市的特殊組成讓它規模能一直增長,全世界都加速朝著城市化邁進。有趣的是,當通訊技術越來越發達時,理論上人們可以住得更遠,但事實卻是人們越住越集中(都市化),但隨著地球的代謝率也一直提高 (暖化),全球持續都市化的步調能否繼續下去,就很難說了。
這本很不容易寫心得,但我總算擠出來了😂
有興趣的可以看看中文書介紹,有沒有比較清楚!“規模的規律與秘密”
全文與鏈接在部落格中👇👇👇
https://dushuyizhi.net/scale-%e8%a6%8f%e6%a8%a1%e7%9a%84%e8%a6%8f%e5%be%8b%e5%92%8c%e7%a7%98%e5%af%86/
#Scale #規模的規律與秘密 #哥吉拉