?

1. Western Renaissance?

In the history of any civilization, history has ended, sometimes more than once. With the emergence of a civilized cosmic country, its people have become blind because of what Toynbee [1] called "immortal fantasy" and are convinced that their civilization is the final form of human society. However, any society that thinks that history is over is usually a society in which history is about to decline.

Is the west an exception to this model? Melkko [2] raised two key questions:

First, is the western civilization a new civilization of its own, completely different from all other civilizations that have ever existed?

Second, will its expansion in the world destroy (or possibly destroy) all the possibilities of other civilizations?

For these two questions, most westerners naturally tend to give affirmative answers. They may be right, but in the past, people who held similar views in other civilizations were wrong.

The west is obviously different from all the existing civilizations, because it has exerted an overwhelming influence on all the civilizations that have existed since 1500. It started the process of world modernization and industrialization. Therefore, all other civilized societies are trying to catch up with the West in wealth and modernization. However, do these characteristics of the West mean that its evolution and change as a civilization are fundamentally different from the common patterns in all other civilizations? Historical evidence and the judgment of more civilized scholars show that this is not the case. So far, there is no significant difference between the development of the west and the co-evolution model of all civilizations in history. The Islamic revival movement and the momentum of Asian economic development show that other civilizations are full of vitality and at least pose a potential threat to the West. A great war involving the West and other countries at the core of civilization is not inevitable, but it may happen. The gradual and irregular decline of the West, which began in the early 20th century, may last for decades or even hundreds of years. Or, the West may experience a stage of revival, reverse the decline of its influence on world affairs, and re-establish its position as a leader for other civilizations to emulate and imitate.

Carol quigley [3] found a common pattern that can be divided into seven stages in the book The Stages of Civilization Evolution. In his view, Western civilization began to form from 370 to 750 A.D. by integrating classical, Semitic, Saracens and barbaric cultural factors. The gestation stage of western civilization lasted from the middle of the 8th century to the end of 10, and then saw-saw movement appeared in the expansion stage and conflict stage, which is rare in other civilizations. According to scholars of the west and other civilizations, the west seems to be coming out of the conflict stage at present. Western civilization has become a safe zone, except for the occasional cold war [4], the internal war in the West is actually unimaginable. The west is developing a system equivalent to the cosmic empire, which is manifested as a composite system in the form of confederation, confederation, political power and other cooperative institutions. It promotes democracy and pluralistic politics at the level of civilization. In short, the west has become a mature society. It is entering such an era. When future generations look back on the past, they will call it the "golden age" according to the repeated pattern of civilization evolution in history. In quigley's words, it is peacetime "because there are no competitors in the region where this civilization itself is located, and it is far from the competition of other external societies, or even there is no such competition". It is also a prosperous period of "ending the destruction of civil war, reducing internal trade barriers, establishing a common system of weights and measures and monetary system, and widely implementing the government expenditure system related to the establishment of the cosmic empire".

In previous civilizations, such a golden age of bliss, which imagined that civilization could be immortal, was either due to the rapid victory of the external society or the slow but equally painful disintegration of the internal society. Events within a civilization are as important to its ability to resist external destructive power as to prevent internal recession. Quigley pointed out in 196 1 that civilization can develop because it has an "expansion tool", that is, a military, religious, political or economic organization, which accumulates surplus and puts it into constructive innovation. When civilization stopped "innovating with surplus, and in modern terms, the investment rate declined", civilization declined. The reason why this happens is that the remaining social groups are controlled to use the surplus for consumption, rather than providing more effective production methods to meet "unproductive and personal vested interests". When people live on capital, civilization moves from a universal country to a declining stage.

With the decline comes the invasion stage. "When a civilization can no longer defend itself because it is no longer willing to defend itself, it opens its doors to barbaric invaders", who often come from "another younger and more powerful civilization".

However, the overwhelming lesson in the history of civilization is that many things are possible but nothing is inevitable. Civilization can and has transformed itself and renewed itself. The central question of the west is whether it can stop and reverse the internal decline process except any external challenges. Will the west innovate itself, or will it accelerate the end of internal corruption, or will it succumb to other civilizations that are more dynamic in economy and population?

In the mid-1990s, there appeared many characteristics of mature civilization in the West that quigley identified as on the verge of decline. Economically, the west is far richer than any other civilization, but its economic growth rate, savings rate and investment rate are very low, especially compared with East Asian societies. The natural birth rate is very low, especially compared with Islamic countries. However, these problems do not necessarily lead to disastrous consequences.

In the west, problems far more important than economy and population are moral decline, cultural isolation and political division.

Often mentioned manifestations of moral decline include:

1. The growth of anti-social behaviors, such as widespread crime, drug abuse and violence;

2. The decline of families, including divorce, illegitimate children, teenage pregnancy and the increase of single-parent families;

3. At least in the United States, there has been a decline in "social capital", that is, the reduction of members of voluntary organizations and the related decline in mutual trust;

4. The general decline of professional ethics and the increase of self-indulgence;

5. The investment in knowledge and academic activities has decreased, which is reflected in the decline of academic achievements in the United States.

The future health of the west and its influence on other societies depend to a great extent on whether it can successfully cope with the above trends. Of course, these trends have enhanced Muslims and Asians' sense of superiority over their own moral strength.

Western culture has been challenged by western internal groups. One of the challenges comes from immigrants from other civilizations, who refuse to integrate into western society and continue to uphold and publicize the values, customs and culture of their native society. This phenomenon is most obvious among Muslims in Europe, but their number is very small. It is also important among many Hispanic minorities in the United States, although to a lesser extent. In this case, if the efforts to assimilate immigrants fail, the United States will become a divided country, and there will be internal conflicts and the possibility of division. In Europe, western civilization will also be destroyed by the weakness of its main component, Christianity. The proportion of Europeans who advocate religious beliefs, observe religious customs and participate in religious activities is declining. This trend reflects not hostility to religion, but indifference to religion. However, in European civilization, Christian thoughts, values and practices still permeate it.

Unlike Europeans, most Americans believe in God and consider themselves a religious country. Many people go to church. The decline of Christianity in the hearts of westerners will only pose a very long-term threat to the health of western civilization at most.

The United States is facing more direct and dangerous challenges. Historically, American national identity is defined by the heritage of western civilization in culture and by the principles of American creed in politics, that is, freedom, democracy, individualism, equality before the law, constitutionalism and private property rights that most Americans agree with. At the end of the 20th century, these two components recognized by the United States were intensively and continuously attacked by a few influential intellectuals and international law experts. Under the banner of multiculturalism, they attack American identity with western culture, deny the existence of common American culture, and advocate the cultural identity and classification of races, nationalities and sub-nationalities.

/kloc-The legislation made after the passage of the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s also showed the trend of multiculturalism. In the 1990s, the Clinton administration took encouraging diversity as one of its main goals. These practices are in sharp contrast to the past. The founders of the United States believe that diversity is a reality and a problem, so they have the national motto "e pluribus unum". This was formulated by the Continental Congress Committee including Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and john adams. Later political leaders were also worried about the threats posed by racial, local, ethnic, economic and cultural diversity (which actually led to the biggest war in the United States during1815-1914), and responded to the call of "Let's unite" and took promoting national reunification as their main responsibility. Theodore roosevelt warned: "There is a situation that will definitely lead to the collapse of the country and hinder all possibilities for the United States to continue to exist as a country, and that is to make the United States a country full of racial disputes." . However, in the 1990s, the United States not only allowed and tried to promote diversified development, but also promoted the unity of the people they managed.

Multiculturalists in the United States also refuse to accept their cultural heritage. However, they do not want the United States to identify with another civilization, but to build a country with multiple civilizations, that is, a country that does not belong to any civilization and lacks a cultural core. History shows that such a country cannot exist as a cohesive society for a long time. A civilized America will no longer be the United States of America, but the United Nations. (Laughter)

Multiculturalists also challenge the core content of American creed by replacing individual rights with collective rights, which are largely defined according to race, nationality, gender and gender preference.

In an era when people all over the world define themselves by culture, where can a society that has no cultural core and only defines itself by political creed stand? Political principles are only the variable foundation of a lasting community. In a multicultural world that emphasizes culture, the United States may be the last backward country in the disappearing ideological western world.

Abandoning American creed and western civilization means the end of the United States of America as we know it. In fact, this also means the end of western civilization. If the United States goes Westernization, then only Europe and a few countries with small European immigrant population will remain in the West. Without the United States, the west would become a negligible and decreasing part of the world's population, living on a tiny half island at the end of Eurasia.

The conflict between multiculturalists and defenders of western civilization and American creed is a "real conflict" in the American part of western civilization. The future of the United States and the West depends on Americans reaffirming their responsibility for Western civilization. In the United States, this means rejecting the temptation of divided multiculturalism. Internationally, this means rejecting the incomprehensible and illusory call for the United States to identify with Asia. No matter what economic ties exist between Asian and American societies, fundamental cultural differences will prevent them from living in the same room. Culturally, the United States is a member of the western family; Multiculturalists may damage or even destroy this relationship, but they cannot replace it. If Americans want to find their cultural roots, they will find them in Europe.

The development and expansion of the western region experienced the first stage that lasted for several centuries, and then the second stage in the 20th century, that is, the American stage. If North America and Europe can renew their moral life based on cultural commonalities and develop close forms of economic and political integration to supplement their security cooperation within NATO, they can create the third stage of western economic prosperity and political influence expansion. Meaningful political integration can, to a certain extent, offset the relative decline of the proportion of the West in world population, economic production and military capabilities, and let other civilizations see the recovery of Western power. However, whether the west can come together politically and economically depends mainly on whether the United States reconfirms its western identity and determines its global role as a leader of western civilization.

Second, the West in the world

A world centered on cultural identity-racial, ethnic, religious and civilized identities-and forming alliances, confrontational relations and national policies according to cultural similarities and differences has three broad meanings for the whole West, especially for the United States:

First of all, only when politicians acknowledge and understand the reality can they change it constructively. Cultural politics is taking shape, and the power of non-western civilization is rising. These societies are expanding their own culture day by day, which has been recognized by the non-western world. Europe once pointed out that the power of culture can unite people and separate them. On the contrary, American elites are slow to accept and grasp these emerging realities. The American government has encountered extraordinary difficulties in adapting to the global political era influenced by the trend of culture and civilization.

Secondly, the foreign policy thinking of the United States is also deeply troubled by the reluctance to give up, change and sometimes even rethink those policies that meet the needs of the Cold War.

Third, the diversity of culture and civilization challenges the western world, especially the universal belief of western culture in the United States. This belief is expressed in the way of explanation and standardization. Explain that it believes that all people in society want to accept western values, systems and time; The western belief in universalism draws a conclusion in a normative way: people all over the world should believe in western values, systems and culture, because it contains the most advanced, progressive, liberal, rational, modern and civilized thoughts of mankind.

In today's emerging world where there are conflicts between nations and civilizations, the western concept of universality has encountered three problems: it is wrong; This is immoral; It's dangerous. This is wrong, this is the central topic of this book.

It is immoral to think that people in non-western countries should accept western values, systems and culture, because it is immoral to achieve this goal. The expansion of power has brought about the spread of culture. If non-western society is shaped by western culture again, it can only be the result of the expansion, deployment and influence of western forces. Imperialism is the inevitable logical result of universalism. As a mature civilization, the west no longer has the economic strength or population strength needed to impose its will on other societies, and any efforts to this end run counter to the western values of self-determination and democracy.

Western universalism is dangerous to the world, because it may lead to war between major civilizations (between the core countries of civilization); This is also dangerous for the west, because it may lead to the failure of the west. For the west, it is wise not to try to stop the transfer of power, but to learn to sail in shallow water, endure pain, reduce risks and defend their own culture.

All civilizations have experienced similar processes of formation, rise and decline. The difference between western civilization and other civilizations lies not in the different ways of development, but in the uniqueness of values and systems. These features include Christianity, pluralism, individualism and legal system, which enable the West to create modernity, expand globally and become the envy of other societies. These characteristics are unique to the whole west. As Arthur Schlesinger [5] said, Europe is "the birthplace and only source of individual freedom, political democracy, legal system, human rights and cultural freedom". These characteristics are European ideas, not Asian, African or Middle Eastern ideas, unless they are accepted by them. These characteristics make western civilization unique. The value of western civilization lies not in its universality, but in its uniqueness. Therefore, the main responsibility of the west is not to try to reshape other civilizations according to the image of the west, which is beyond the reach of the weakening power of the west, but to preserve, maintain and revive the unique characteristics of western civilization. As the United States is the most powerful western country, this responsibility inevitably falls mainly on the shoulders of the United States of America.

In the face of the decline of western power, protecting western civilization is beneficial to the United States and European countries. In order to achieve this goal, they need:

1. Strengthen political, economic and military integration, coordinate policies and prevent countries belonging to other civilizations from taking advantage of their differences;

2. Incorporate Central and Western countries into the EU and NATO;

3. Encourage the "Westernization" of Latin America, so that Latin American countries can form a close alliance with the West as much as possible;

4. Restrain the development of conventional and unconventional military forces in Islamic and China countries;

5. Delaying Japan's departure from the West and adapting to China;

6. Recognize that Russia is the core country of the Orthodox Church and a regional power, and it is Russia's legitimate interest to ensure the security of the southern border;

7. Maintain the superiority of western technology and military power over other civilizations;

8. Most importantly, it is recognized that western intervention in other civilized things may be the most dangerous factor causing instability and potential global conflicts in a multicultural world.

In such an era, the United States can neither rule the world nor escape from it. Neither internationalism nor isolationism, nor multilateralism nor unilateralism is in the interest of the United States. Only by avoiding these extreme practices and adopting the Atlanticist policy of close cooperation with European partners, and protecting and promoting the interests and values of unique civilization shared by all, can the interests of the United States be promoted most effectively.

Three. War and order among civilizations

A more dangerous factor that triggers the global civilization war is the change of power balance between civilizations and their core countries. If the rise of China and the increasing self-extension of this "biggest role in human history" continue, it will bring great pressure to the world stability at the beginning of the 2 1 century.

In the coming era, in order to avoid the war between civilizations, the core countries should avoid interfering in the conflicts of other civilizations. But the fact is that some countries, especially the United States, will undoubtedly think this is unacceptable. The principle of "avoidance", that is, the core countries avoid intervening in the conflicts of other civilizations, is the primary condition for maintaining peace in a multi-civilized and multipolar world. The second condition is the "principle of joint mediation", that is, the core countries negotiate with each other to contain or stop the fault line war between these civilized countries or groups.

It is not easy for the west and those civilizations that aim to supplement or replace the leading role of the west to accept these principles and a more equal world among civilizations. For example, in such a world, the core countries may regard the possession of nuclear weapons as their privilege and not allow other countries of this civilization to have them; In a civilization lacking a core country, the struggle for leadership will also stimulate the competition for possessing nuclear weapons.

Nuclear proliferation is obviously dangerous. A world in which one or two core countries of major civilizations possess nuclear weapons and other countries do not possess nuclear weapons may be a moderately stable world.

Most major international institutions established shortly after the Second World War are based on Western interests, values and practices. When the power of the west declines relative to other civilizations, these international institutions will be reorganized under pressure to adapt to the interests of other civilizations. The most obvious, important and perhaps most controversial issue is the permanent seat on the UN Security Council. The permanent members are composed of the major victors in the Second World War, but this situation is increasingly out of line with the reality of world powers. So there will be two changes in the future for a long time, one is to change the composition of member States, and the other is to formulate some less formal procedures to deal with security issues. In a multi-civilized world, it is ideal that every major civilization should have at least one permanent seat in the Security Council. But at present, there are only three civilizations.

Each of the seven civilizations has a permanent seat, while the West has two. This distribution scheme broadly reflects the distribution of world population, wealth and power.

Fourth, the commonness of civilization.

Multicultural America is impossible, because non-western America cannot be America. A multicultural world is inevitable because it is impossible to build a global empire. To maintain the United States and the West, it is necessary to rebuild Western identity. In order to maintain world security, we need to accept global multiculturalism.

Cultural coexistence needs to seek the common ground of most civilizations, rather than promoting the universal characteristics of an imaginary civilization. In a multicultural world, the constructive way is to abandon universalism, accept diversity and seek commonality.

At least on the basic "superficial" moral level, Asia and the West have some commonalities. No matter how different the world's major religions are from human beings, they all share some important values. If mankind will develop a world civilization one day, it will be gradually formed by exploring and developing these commonalities. Therefore, in a multi-civilized world, apart from the principle of avoidance and the principle of joint mediation, peacekeeping needs a third principle, that is, the principle of commonality: people of all civilizations should seek and expand the values, systems and practices shared with other civilizations.

In the 1950s, lester pearson [6] warned that mankind is entering an era, and different civilizations must learn to live together in peaceful exchanges, learn from each other, study each other's history, ideals, art and culture, and enrich each other's lives. Otherwise, in this crowded and narrow world, there will be misunderstandings, tensions, conflicts and disasters. "The future of peace and civilization depends on the understanding and cooperation between the political, spiritual and intellectual leaders of the world's major civilizations. In the clash of civilizations, Europe and the United States either join hands or go their separate ways. In the greater conflict between civilization and barbarism, that is, the global "real conflict", the great civilizations in the world who have achieved fruitful results in religion, art, literature, philosophy, science, technology, morality and emotion will also join hands or go their separate ways. In the era of division, the clash of civilizations is the greatest threat to world peace, and the international order based on multi-civilization is the most reliable guarantee to prevent world war.

Arnold Yue Se Toynbee (1889- 1975) is a famous British historian. Known as the greatest historian in modern times. Masterpieces: Historical Research, Man and Mother Earth, 2 1 Century Prospect. Among them, Historical Research is considered as the greatest historical work in the 20th century.

[2] Matthew Melkko. Americans. The author of The Essence of Civilization. The rest is unknown.

[3] Carol quigley (19 10- 1977): a famous American historian. After graduating from Harvard University, he taught at Princeton University and Harvard University. 194 1 and then transferred to the Diplomatic Academy of Georgetown University until 1976. His representative works include: Evolution of Civilization: An Introduction to Historical Analysis (196 1) and Tragedy and Hope: A World History of Our Time (1966).

[4] Cod War: refers to the fishing conflict between Iceland and Britain from 1958 to 1976. The war lasted for nearly 20 years.

[5] Arthur Schlesinger (19 17-2007) is a famous American historian and political critic. A former White House Special Assistant to President Kennedy of the United States, he was called "the person who knows Roosevelt and Kennedy best". He won the Pulitzer Prize twice for The Jackson Age and One Thousand Days of Kennedy in the White House.

[6] lester pearson (1897- 1972): Canadian politician and diplomat. The 1st14th Prime Minister of Canada. The idea of UN peacekeeping force was first put forward by Pearson. He won the 1957 Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to solve the Suez crisis in 1956. 1963 became prime minister, 1968 resigned as prime minister and retired from politics.