/CONT.

Bushbred, responding to your contribution, I was contrasting the above in relation to the US (West) in Viet-nam, where there appears to a difference between American ideals (French, Enlightenment Thinkers Founding Fathers)and its actions abroad. External dominance.

Hence, with historical China, we have “internal” suppression of themselves, and, with the West “external” domination of others. Different loci:

The Chinese state is controlling, inhibited by instilling extreme cohesiveness. Anglo-Western states (including Oz and the US), as Reginald states, need look beyond basing all society on science, because we all can learn from Holism, which includes, but is not limited to, elements of the Chinese classics.

Globally, we do have the “magic formula”; but, we, BOTH (East/West), must drop cherished beliefs, and, be willing fuse ideas and systems. We Westerners don’t need to be Chinese. Chinese don’t to be Westerners. Not cross-over, rather fusion/melding of the best qualities. Gather the best; disregard the worse.

The Old West morphed in the New West. This is the first [global] transition. The second (next) transition is for the East [read primary China] to morph into the New East. A third (future) transition would a fusion a future neo-West and a neo-East.

Herein, modernity is not just technical; rather; technical, sociological and ideological. A pipe dream? Most likely. But a pipe dream realisable only over the next 50-150 years, during currect civilisational interregnum. Elsewise, by c. 2200-2250, the chance will be lost, if either, the West or the East, gains ascendency, before “civilizational” unification.

Metaphorically, neither Westerners nor Easterners need to change horses, we need to invent the car. Actually, improve own horses, then share the car.

Confucius was once said “one cannot see the face of the mountain from the inside”. Good advice, methinks. Bushbred, its more than American hypocrisy; Reginald, its more than the West understanding Chinese classics; Oliver [i.e., me], it is China’s heavy handed suppression of cultural descent. It is about taking a bird’s eye view of civilizations and cherry-pecking, wisely.

Peter

"Confucius was once said “one cannot see the face of the mountain from the inside”. Good advice, methinks. Bushbred, IT IS MORE THAN American hypocrisy; Reginald, IT IS MORE THAN the West understanding Chinese classics; Oliver [i.e., me], IT MORE THAN China’s heavy handed suppression of cultural descent. It is about taking a bird’s eye view of civilizations and cherry-pecking, wisely." --- Oliver

Changing sides solves little. We will have the same opinions but different people.

With China/West in globalisation I put it. that Daoism has greater potential than Confucianism, as the Daoism accepts complementary positions. Perhaps, for sociological reasons, the West would need to be/or play, Ying, female, even if it isn't. To China a being Yang, the masculine, here, The Middle Kingdom. In personal human relations, when there was a thin crescent Moon, it took the Moon and nine concubines to balance the Son of Heavens, Yang. [Full Moon, the Empress and the Moon]

Pt2.

There is a Chinese saying, "there cannot be two suns in the sky. However, there is another saying, "There is only one sun in the sky and it is a Western sun". A tough one ? Howver, Daoism might just meld the seemly unrconcilable.

But China and the US need to change:

China needs to dilute, vertical deference and extend "open" horizontal altruism to other other countries. China is too controlled and secretive for its own good.

US: Nationalism is dangerous in the age of the ideological civilization: e.g., Germany fought the greater West.

The US must apprecaite it does not a stand-alone civilization, with subordinate satelitte's in coalition; it is merely the most recent centre state of Western civilization.

The US recently was the only contry in the World to vote in the UN against small arms exports. IS the States on a power-trip, and, acting like a nineteenth century state even. toward its allies
and toward seriously advanced First World countries. Acting as only the captain of the West and not whole team?

China and the US, for your own good, please get of your high horses. China please learn the advantage of sharing and openness. America you are not the only player: You have lost site of your founding [Emlightened French] ideals.

The above is meant as helpful advice not criticism. Having been to China and the States, I have geat affection of both nations. Sadly, politics and pride stand in the way of collective progress.

Come on guys; Humanity is bigger than both of you.

O.

Reg and Bushy,

cLATIFICATION: "Come on guys; Humanity is bigger than both of you." -Oliver. Guess "guys" should READ "gails". I think countries, ships and mountains (?) are feminine. Major storms are can now be male.

- China is too inward looking (bad) and is holistic (good).

- The West is outward looking (good) and is good at initiating
science (good)and pretty much ignores holism (bad)

- China expects deference (off-putting to others)

- The US wants be a state outside of the West (potentially dangerous)

>>>The US needs to centre itself with a West cognizant of holism,
while maintaining scientific method. China needs to establish itself as an "open" superpower, be less secretive and engage the world and forget Middle Kingdom bit.

No US hegemony, nor Chinese supremacy... Holism and scientific method... A pipe dream? If so, please don't wake me up. :-) "

O.