kjbk

Freitag, 8. Mai 2020

New World Order and the Man Behind Chinese President

This analysis is also published by CNN host Michael Smerconish:
https://www.smerconish.com/news/2020/5/8/new-world-order-and-the-man-behind-chinese-president


Amidst all these factions profiting enormously from the despair of the 99% in this Coronavirus Crisis some are obnoxiously bored while the many fight for survival. Is history repeating itself right now? US-President Harry S. Truman once said: "The only thing new is the history you do not know."

So, throughout the centuries the various Chinese Emperors were influenced in their thoughts and actions by state philosophers. Depending on the state philosophers' human quality this was a blessing or a curse for the people. Now it's President Xi Jinping, "paramount leader" since 2012, influenced by state philosopher and Chinese Academy of Social Sciences professor Zhao Tingyang (author of "Redefining a Philosophy for World Governance" pushed by his co-author French marxist Régis Debray, the philosophical mastermind behind revolutionary Che Guevara). Zhao defines a China-led New World Order diagnosing the West as caught up in the "Ego-Trap".

If you ask me "business ethics" became a travesty, all societal values rationalized to "shareholder value". Why? Western leaders, apparently disgusted by moral philosophy only following economics, accordingly underestimated state philosopher Zhao's role and influence on a centralized People's Republic of China turning more and more into a digital totalitarian state.

As a philosopher myself, blessed with ancient Chinese knowledge and dear Chinese friends, I emphasize the importance of being trained not only in one's own culture's philosophical thought and logics, but also in other cultures' philosophical thought and most importantly in ethics, sociology of knowledge and criticism of ideology. The latter Zhao Tingyang seems to discard.

Historically speaking, the West in "splendid isolation" driven by corporate greed  dangerously underestimated China decades-long. Now with the People's Republic of China's bid for power we are experiencing a globalization process finalized, a hand-over of power from the West to China towards planet domination - reminding of the collective superiority complex of Germany rising in the 1930s while the whole world was watching (appeasement policy). State philosopher Zhao pushes China as future of mankind.

So, when supposedly the West is caught up in an Ego-Trap driven by the individual mind, then China is on a governmentally-orchestrated Ego-Trip driven by the collective mind, starting long before Coronavirus occurred.

Anti-social neoliberalists and tax-evading multinational corporations exploiting this situation are bad enough, no need for economies on their knees falling pray to China cornering the market. Is the power vacuum Covid-19 creates ultimately filled with brotherly love or by China's ultimate claim to power in the race for global dominance? Recent worldwide governmental Covid-19 measures restricting Western freedoms give everyone an initial foretaste of what it is like to live under the Chinese rule.

Symptomatically for its antipathy against individualism China pushes to take over the Internet considered deficient, since too individualistic. Is the world heading for a streamlined New Internet controlled by China? It's disturbing that China is successfully winning allies for reinventing the Internet towards a China-led censored Internet called "New IP". The Internet has flaws, but good gracious a China-led Internet isn't the solution.

What exactly makes Beijing's politburo so convinced to be the next world leader? It's the state philosopher Zhao Tingyang's conviction that Christianity and individuality is the origin of all evil and disbalance in the world. Zhao considers human rights as derivate of Christianity and rejects its claim to be universal, inherent to every individual without discrimination, inalienable rights applying to everyone on this planet.

By the way, that's the main argument pushed by non-Western thinkers to delegitimize human rights and their universal claim applying to everyone on the face of this Earth. But this argument against human rights mostly non-Westerners put forward has at least one essential flaw itself. It's self-undermining by the "Genetic Fallacy" (Ernest Nagel): Basing an argument's truth claim on the origin of its claims or premises. In short: An arguments value is assessed by who said it. In other words the origin of the argument determines whether it's perceived true or false? Therefore the "Genetic Fallacy" is also called "Fallacy of Origin" or "Fallacy of Virtue".

So it's most essential to note, that the whole argument against human rights and democracy (refused for it's Western origin) is not only self-contradicting but a farce and on the same level as rejecting to use numbers because of their Arabic origin.

Of course I am fully aware of myself arguing according to my Western education and stance - sure I am, and passionately I am doing so, as most likely I would not be allowed to even write and publish this article in Mainland China. I consider myself blessed to be educated in (Austria's University of Graz, known for its Analytical Philosophy). So I am arguing from the basis of my education in Western Philosophy.

Compared to Immanuel Kant's categorical imperative ("Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law”) - providing the most freedom possible for the individual while respecting others, Chinese state philosopher Zhao Tanjing's proposed interpretation of the age-old concept of "Tianxia" (all under the heaven) seems nationalist as well as orientating on the Chinese family structure, only fueling a Chinese-led New World Order rejecting human rights and democracy as Western.

The instance that the Chinese Government has prohibited free publishing about the origins of Coronavirus without being censored by the Chinese Government before publishing makes the Chinese regime's approach neither trustworthy nor its proposed way of life simpatico. Why doesn't the Chinese Government rely on the thoughts of the Chinese philanthropist philosopher Mencius (humans are innately good) but on misanthropes like Xunzi (human nature is evil) or on Zhao Tingyang? Maybe the Chinese model contributes to an increasing number of countries and universities closing Confucius Institutes on their campuses criticized for being listening posts of the Chinese Government in foreign countries and violating Western human rights standards? Confucius would turn in his grave, if he knew what his name is used for.

If you ask me as philosopher, it's all about the balance between individuality and collectivity. In other words it's about the equilibrium of the individual mind and the collective mind, an equilibrium which is always to keep for the sake of a sustainable future of mankind.

Hence it was way to easy to wipe away Mainland China's claim as propaganda, fake news, you name it, since the long propagated neoliberalist alibi "the market will regulate itself and the 'invisible hand' - as balancing instrument - will take care of society" only unleashed neoliberalists to destroy the world and society for the last decades. Even the "Business Insider" publishes: Coronavirus didn't bring the economy down - 40 years of greed and corporate malfeasance did.

But at the same time it is also true that the pushed Chinese model with its focus on collectivity, putting the collective first, has itself not only led to a huge pollution problem in China and the world, but has also put the individual in shackles and therefore suppressed its individuality, its creativity and innovation. No wonder, that for decades Mainland China's strong suit was and still is to copy all the creativity and innovation from around the world, and especially from the West.

The Chinese model features a lack of ingenuity coming from a society holding everyone in fear, getting everyone in line and position of attention while crippling the individual in its expression and withholding the individual from expressing its voice, its creativity and its innovative powers. So we can only hope to keep our personal freedom and that the world isn't forced into complying to live according to "Tianxi" under Chinese rule.

So just in case if somebody didn't know it by now, we are in the middle of a culture war, you may name it "WW3 lite", raging between at least two war factions, one: the individual-based West and the other: the collective-based East.

If you ask me, the solution was the golden mean, the juste milieu, to take the best from both sides. But that would need the West to find back to its values - it maybe never had practically - and change from a greed-run society to a balanced capitalism (e.g. an eco-social market economy - propagated by former Austrian Vice President Josef Riegler) putting shackles on an unleashed, anti-social, selfish, ruinous and greed-run neoliberalism by respecting nature, social responsibility and humanity. And on the other hand this would also demand from the People's Republic of China to let go from its governmental-run "collective control neurosis" and to finally grant its citizens and the world personal freedoms and human rights - freedom of expression, individuality, creativity, innovative powers...

Facing the world today, US-President Benjamin Franklin occurs to me: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
It's about time for less anti-social and control addictive policies on all sides. Therefore we need to show more wisdom individually and collectively.

Dr. Dr. Immanuel Fruhmann
Systemic Analyst and Philosopher

Keine Kommentare:

Kommentar posten