TEDSalon london 2010Martin Jacques: Understanding the rise of China

[houshanghai]

About this talk

Speaking at a TED Salon in London, economist Martin Jacques asks: How do we in the West make sense of China and its phenomenal rise? The author of "When China Rules the World," he examines why the West often puzzles over the growing power of the Chinese economy, and offers three building blocks for understanding what China is and will become.

About Martin Jacques

Martin Jacques is the author of "When China Rules the World," and a columnist for the Guardian and New Statesman. He was a co-founder of the think tank Demos.

[video]http://player.youku.com/player.php/sid/XMjQ0MDIwMzMy/v.swf[/video]


link:http://www.ted.com/talks/martin_jacques_understanding_the_rise_of_china.htm l

 

[webber]

Martin Jacques is brilliant in facts and history

not very good in predicting

 

[CardSharp]

Looks interest, will watch it.

 

[CardSharp]

A couple of things so far.

He gives 2020 as the date for when China reaches parity with the US. Not really reasonable.

He also says that it will be the first time that a non-western nation will be the dominants power in the world. Not true. The world has been multipolar for most of human history.

 

[CardSharp]

He does have a good point about China being a civilization state rather than a nation state that China as an idea goes back much further than the last 100 year or the PRC.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Martin Jacques is brilliant in facts and history

not very good in predicting

Martin Jacques had a sad experience in Hong Kong, I wonder if that affected his outlook.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

He does have a good point about China being a civilization state rather than a nation state that China as an idea goes back much further than the last 100 year or the PRC.

Absolutely.

I think the phrase "civilization state" is a good description of China. It makes it so much easier for outsiders to understand what China is about.

 

[CardSharp]

Absolutely.

I think the phrase "civilization state" is a good description of China. It makes it so much easier for outsiders to understand what China is about.

It's something that is hard to explain to outsiders, and it is why I keep arguing that India was not a comparable entity through history despite population, wealth, empire etc. Can't really explain it in an convincing way, yet most Chinese people would know what I am talking about.

 

[CardSharp]

Martin Jacques had a sad experience in Hong Kong, I wonder if that affected his outlook.

I read about his story just now. Absolutely horrible, let's hope that attitudes will change and something like that never ever happens again.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

I read about his story just now. Absolutely horrible, let's hope that attitudes will change and something like that never ever happens again.

You're right. And I really admire the fact that he managed to keep a neutral outlook in his further work.

 

[CardSharp]

Hmmm I thought it was very insightful. He might be one of those rare westerners who understand China the good and the bad.

 

[no_name]

It's something that is hard to explain to outsiders, and it is why I keep arguing that India was not a comparable entity through history despite population, wealth, empire etc. Can't really explain it in an convincing way, yet most Chinese people would know what I am talking about.

It's hard to explain I think, because in china's case - A ruler unifies the people's support, then base his state on the constituents of the people. Whereas else where, a group of people creat a statehood defined by themselves, then attempt to apply it to the larger mass of different people.

China's power is actually suprisingly grassroot based (peasant). Whereas in many cultures around the world, changes were instigated by higher class people who mobilize their own faction of followers.

In so many chinese dynasty overthrows- the new power comes from a leader who is able to rally the common people directly. Hence in the formation of new empire the people has always considered themselves to be a part of the contribution, and therefore they identify alot stronger to the state.

Mao saw it for what it is - the people are the water, revolutionaries are the fishes.