CHINESE VALUES AND AMERICAN VALUES UNDER GLOBALIZATION
- Changes in Political Culture and Prospects for a Harmonious World

Ross Terrill

The world in 2012 enjoys a prosperity unmatched in modern history, but it is a partly fractured world. The post-1945 structures centered on the UN lost touch with reality decades ago. Can American values and Chinese values together contribute to a new world order? This may be the single greatest challenge for the era of Globalization.

No one disputes the longevity and quality of Chinese values. But since the late Qing dynasty they have fluctuated drastically. Can current Chinese public values - Chinese nationalism, paternalistic capitalism, stability - align at all with American values? American domestic policy values are individual self-reliance, freedom of thought and association, constitutional government, and community autonomy. American foreign policy values have been less stable and more controversial, inside the U.S. and outside. Three schools have existed: Realism, Isolationism, and Idealism. A mixture generally occurs because of the nature of the U.S.’s rise in the 20th century.

In 2012, U.S. values seem less distinct than before. Most important, the economic interdependence of globalization has reduced the nexus between American business and American foreign policy. Chinese values have stood still even less than American values. We may say Chinese and American public values have never been closer in history.

The 20th century saw several disastrous attempts at world harmony. At this stage in history we must dismiss the concept of a Harmonious World as out of reach. An alternative, Multilateralism, is unlikely to be stable or peaceful. Reasonably promising to maximize peace is Equilibrium, which could be envisaged through one of the following:

1) China takes the leading role in a new definition of global order, with rules and issues heavily influenced by Beijing, that is accepted by key nations.

2) Continued America primacy for some decades, modified to account for the U.S.’s relative decline and for Globalization’s limits on any great power’s ability to change history.

3) Should the concept of unilateralism be mortally wounded by globalization, a “G2” with China and the U.S. as the leadership powers may seem logical.

 

全球化背景下的中美价值观：政治文化的转变与和谐世界之前景

特里尔

2012年，世界迎来了现代历史上前所未有的繁荣，却同时面临局部分裂。1945年后建立的以联合国为中心的各种机构在几十年前已脱离实际。中美各自的价值观能共同为新的世界秩序做出贡献吗？这或许是全球化时代所面临的最大挑战。

没有人怀疑中国价值观的悠久与品质。但是，自清末始，传统中国价值观经历了急剧变化。当今中国的公共价值观——中国的民族主义、家长式的资本主义及追求稳定——能否与美国价值观结盟？美国国内政策的基本价值观包括个人自主自立、思想自由、结社自由、宪政及社团自主管理。相对而言，美国外交政策的价值观在国内和国外显得更不稳定且更多争议。美国今日外交政策有三大流派：现实主义、孤立主义、理想主义。由于美国20世纪崛起，通常会出现这三大流派的混合体。

2012年，美国价值观不再如以前那么分明。最重要的是，全球化背景下各国经济相互依存，削弱了美国商业与外交政策之间的联系。而中国价值观比美国价值观经历的变化更多。我们可以说，有史以来，中美的公共价值取向从未如此接近。

二十世纪见证了几次意欲破坏世界和谐的灾难性企图。在当今历史阶段，我们必须搁置和谐世界这个想法，因为它不可企及。作为另一种可能性的多边主义，也不可能带来稳定或者和平。能使和平最大化的理性选择是保持均衡，可从以下三点中的任何一点来设想：

一、在重新确立全球秩序时，中国将起主导作用，中国政府将在制定国际规则和解决国际问题方面施加影响；这种局面也会被世界各主要国家接受。二、美国为领导的局面仍将持续几十年，但因美国的相对衰落及全球化对大国改变历史的能力的限制，这个局面将得到一些调整。三、如果全球化对单边主义造成致命打击，中美“二国集团”成为领袖力量或许可行。