scholarly journals Century of the Communist Party of China and the perspective of socialism with a Chinese specificity

Author(s):  
Ivan I. Antonovich

The article analyses the main directions and paths of Chinese modernisation, the features of the US’ opposition to it, it is concluded that the success of socialism with Chinese characteristics creates a new world situation in which new socio-economic civilisational foundations can create a society of socialist orientation. It is noted that Deng Xiaoping, without holding any government posts, being only the chairman of the CPC Central Committee’s Defense Committee, led the process of Chinese modernisation, which brought China to the forefront of scientific, technological and social progress in the world. The author argues that the basis of Chinese success is the Leninist formula of the NEP – the use of private entrepreneurship under the control of a socialist state in order to develop at an accelerated rate of social wealth in the amount necessary to meet the basic life needs of its citizens. The path of China was fraught with many unsuccessful and tragic experiments, therefore the current socio-economic leap forward in civilisation is an unprecedented event in world history. The implementation of goals and objectives of such a global scale will make serious changes in the world order, and require a new political philosophy. The success of socialism with Chinese characteristics within the country, as well as in programs to support the progressive development of countries and peoples of the world ready for cooperation, allows us to give a cautious optimistic assessment of the future Chinese perspective. And this, according to the author, is today a clear threat to the tasks and goals of American domination in the world.

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (04) ◽  
pp. 92-106
Author(s):  
Vitaly KOZYREV

The recent deterioration of US–China and US–Russia relations has stumbled the formation of a better world order in the 21st century. Washington’s concerns of the “great power realignment”, as well as its Manichean battle against China’s and Russia’s “illiberal regimes” have resulted in the activated alliance-building efforts between Beijing and Moscow, prompting the Biden administration to consider some wedging strategies. Despite their coordinated preparation to deter the US power, the Chinese and Russian leaderships seek to avert a conflict with Washington by diplomatic means, and the characteristic of their partnership is still leaving a “window of opportunity” for the United States to lever against the establishment of a formal Sino–Russian alliance.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-34
Author(s):  
Akhtar Gul ◽  
Tanbila Ghafoor ◽  
Fatima Zahra

The aim of this paper describes world’s future post-COVID-19. Coronavirus resemble pandemics exist in centuries. Exactly, one century ago influenza flu affected the world economy and social order. About millions of people died caused by pandemics along with weak and collapsed economies. The pandemic entirely affected every sphere of life, including, Labor demand and supply, tourism, economy, politics, and nature of the world.  There are two possible scenarios of the world post-Covid-19. First one world will enter new wars, hunger, and world order and so on. Second one, whole states collectively tackle this pandemic. Firstly, Economic and military strength determine the political power of a state. The US has been facing severe and critical crises since 2016. Thus, the US will not maintain power more and more. USA’s One Step Back Policy will collapse USA power and Trump loses the election, and new president will impose new wars on Asian land. European Union will disintegrate due to race of power among the powers along with world face. Secondly, China will impose a new world order after COVID-19. Because China policies totally different from previous superpowers. During supremacy, the Great Britain and USA were adopted aggressive political and military policies. In Contrast, China adopted an economic policy which is beneficial for every society. China started to lead the world economically and politically. So, this gap will create a new war in Asia and globally. China Economic Network policy (BRI) would cover world in 2040 years. Thirdly, world economies will face severe economic conditions like 1923, 1929 and 2008. The current recession and political scenarios are knocking a depression on world economic door. Fourthly, emerging economy India will not cover economic power till 2025. Maybe India never achieves economic prosperity due to Jingoistic approach.  In this paper, we predicate world’s economic and politics shape post-covid-19. The virus is changed every sphere and every field of life. ? We used NiGEM model. It’s just predication, will what occur in future. About 3% Gross Domestic Product, 10% consumption, 18% manufacturing and 13% to 32% trade declined due to current pandemics. Universal recession also take place. Now, how the world’s powerful state will push the world into new wars. Which one imposed new world order post-covid-19? Does a new Great Depression knock world door


2021 ◽  
pp. 226-232
Author(s):  
Ashley L. Cohen

This coda studies the Indies mentality's demise. When the organization of global space shifted once more under the leadership of a new geopolitical world order, the two Indies ceased to be a compelling framework for organizing knowledge of the world. The chapter locates the swansong of the Indies mentality in the 1870s, the onset of the US systemic cycle. To be sure, the Indies mentality was residual by this time; but it was also still powerful. American desires for geopolitical dominance took shape during Britain's systemic cycle, and they bear the cultural imprint of British hegemony. One of the events that sealed the United States's rise to hegemonic status was the completion of the first transcontinental railroad to the Pacific, which was widely hailed as an American “Passage to India.” The chapter then makes the case for the portability of this book's method, especially in the context of postcolonial studies, where it can be used to reconstruct and reinhabit non-European epistemologies.


2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 133
Author(s):  
Anna Rhodora Solar ◽  
John Matthew Poblete

The Philippines had its own share of colonial past. Just as other Asian and African countries which were under the Western colonizers, the Philippines partook of the momentous event that proposed an alternative to the world order dominated by superpowers—the Bandung Conference. The principles collectively known as Bandung Spirit were embraced by the Philippines and had a clear understanding of its symbolic significance. Yet such understanding of these principles was coupled with compromises on the Philippines relations with the United States. Over the decades, the Philippines had to do a balancing act between its being sovereign, independent state and its recognition of the relevance of its past colonial master—the US. Hence, this raises the question of whether the Philippines is living or leaving the Bandung Spirit. Specifically, this paper assesses whether the Philippines still upholds the same Bandung Spirit in its traditional form or has it given a contemporary understanding of it. The paper argues that the Philippine-US relations remain to be an evident display of US presence in Southeast Asia albeit redefined to blend with the Bandung Spirit.


Author(s):  
L. L. Fituni

The article lays out a hypothesis that the global order slides into a new bipolarity in the context of the escalating geo-economic and geopolitical confrontation between the two poles that currently dominate the world - the United States and China. The neo-bipolar construction cannot yet be regarded as an established new world order, but the general movement of the world economy and international relations in this direction is obvious. The neo-bipolar bipolar confrontation manifest itself with varying intensity in different regions of the world. The author argues that at present the peripheral regions which are strategically important for the prospects of competition are becoming an important testing ground for relatively “safe” elaboration of methods and tactics of geo-economic rivalry and h mutual exchange of systemic attacks. Today, Africa has become practically the leading theater of the new bipolar confrontation. The article analyzes the economic, military and strategic aspects of the rivalry between the United States and China on the African continent. It provides a comparative analysis of the new African strategies of the two superpowers adopted at the end of 2018. The author asserts that in the context of the emerging global bipolarity, the strategies of the USA and China represent antagonistic programs based on fundamentally different initial messages. In the case of the US strategy, this is to deter by denial the spread of the competitor’s influence using tough policies, including forceful (while not necessarily military) confrontational actions. While China seeks to neutralize the opposition of the United States and its allies to Beijing’s expansion on the continent and to win the freedom of interaction with any partners in Africa causing minimal direct confrontation possible. Therefore, despite the seemingly “peripheral” importance of the confrontation on the continent, for the establishment of a neo-bipolar world order, the proclamation of the new US regional geopolitical strategy, which focuses on the containment of China in the name of protecting democracy and independence, can serve not only for Africa, but for the whole planet the same milestone signal as Churchill’s Fulton speech for the final advent of bipolarity in the postwar world.


2019 ◽  
Vol 64 (2) ◽  
pp. 309-323
Author(s):  
Pim de Zwart

Inequality has increased in most Western countries since the early 1980s. In a recent report, the international non-governmental organization Oxfam noted that the twenty-six richest people in the world own as much wealth as the poorest fifty per cent of the world's population. Discontent with the growing disparities in wealth and income has soared in recent years, especially in the wake of the 2007/2008 financial crisis and the “Great Recession” that followed. The Occupy movement protested against the greed of the “one per cent”, referring to the highly skewed income distribution in the US. Former US president Barack Obama proclaimed the growth of within-country economic inequality as “the defining challenge of our time”. Yet, he enacted few policies that reduced inequality during his two terms in office; the Gini coefficient in the US actually increased slightly between 2007 and 2016. His successor, whose election has often been explained as a consequence of these high levels of inequality, has slashed taxes for the wealthy, probably causing further rises in inequality in the future. In this essay, I will review two recent economic history books that examine the historical roots of within-country inequality on a global scale: Branko Milanovic's Global Inequality (2016) and Walter Scheidel's The Great Leveler (2017). Formerly a lead economist at the World Bank, Milanovic is a well-known scholar working in the field of economic inequality, while Scheidel has a background as a specialist in the economic, social, and demographic history of antiquity.


2015 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Min-Hua Chiang

This article studies the US hegemony with particular focus on its dominant role in East Asia and compares conventional thoughts with different views provided by the two books reviewed. Reich and Lebow considered that American hegemony has started to erode when other nations regained their economic strength and political stability during the postwar decades. Acharya’s main argument is focusing on the decline of the American world order, rather than the decline of the US. Authors from the two books jumped out from the conventional zero-sum game between the rising China and the declining US power and consider other regional players in constructing the world order. However, this article argued that if China was not able to challenge the US power presence, there is no reason to assume the IS power decline. The establishment of the institutionalized network with involvement of several countries would only to strengthen the US dominance, rather than to weaken it.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 28-44
Author(s):  
A. P. Tsygankov

The article discusses the modern stage of international relations as a transition from the US-centric to another, polycentric world order. America has many opportunities to infl uence the formation of the future world order, which it uses for maintaining a dominant role in the world. However, America also has severe weaknesses for making the global transition; the main one considers the psychological unpreparedness of the country’s establishment for a change in the global role of the United States. The country’s transitional situation gives rise to an identity crisis, accompanied by the most heated debates in the political class regarding the development of foreign policy and strategy. In the variety of positions and narratives of the American strategy, one can distinguish (1) proponents of the liberal globalization and maintaining America’s dominant position, (2) advocates of superpower status and resource dominance by coercion and (3) realists or those who call for building a new global balance of power and coordinating the US interests with other powers. This identity crisis is associated with the globally changing position of the country that has been at the center of the international system for the past 75 years. The American political class was never monolithic before and even during the Cold War, representing a range of diff erent foreign policy ideas and positions. However, foreign policy disagreements previously did not question the national identity and fundamental value of the country. For America, these values were associated with a global role in promoting the ideals of freedom and liberal democracy, previously underpinned by confrontation with the USSR. The disappearance of the Soviet power strengthened the position of liberal globalists and enhanced the strategic narrative of the global promotion of American values. The diff erence of the contemporary period is that nationalists and realists no longer accept the arguments of liberal globalists, resulting in a deepening of ideological polarization in the political class and society. The domestic ideational and political crisis splits the elites, delays the transition to a new world order, and makes it impossible to pursue a sound international strategy. Such a strategy will be the result of both an internal political struggle and a response of the country’s leadership to the processes of pluralization and polycentrism developing in the world.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 247-256

Összefoglaló. A második világháborút követően talán nem volt egyetlen esemény sem, amely olyan hatást gyakorolt a világ országaira, mint a koronavírus-járvány kirobbanása. A vírus-válság felgyorsította a liberális világrend erózióját, kiélezte a nagyhatalmak közötti ellentéteket, válságforgatókönyvek és prognózisok készültek. A válság rávilágított arra is, hogy kudarcra vannak ítélve azok a kormányzatok, amelyek nem ruháztak be a közösségi infrastruktúrába, és elhanyagolták a közszolgálati tudást. Az is kiderült, hogy a kormányzati intézményeknek szakértőkre és nem lojális mamelukokra van szüksége a válsághelyzetből fakadó közpolitikai gondok megoldása során. Egy világméretű és példátlan sebességgel terjedő válság elleni eredményes fellépés elsődleges frontvonala tehát a nemzetállam maradt. Summary. In times of crisis, all political systems give the executive exceptional powers, as it is not possible to face new and rapidly changing challenges within the framework of existing laws. One of the American founding fathers, Alexander Hamilton, who feared the excessive power of central government, believed that in times of emergency the system of checks and balances should be suspended. Constitutional democracy will be threatened if the rule of law is not restored after the emergency has passed. Perhaps no event since the Second World War has had such an impact on the countries of the world as the outbreak of the coronavirus epidemic. The virus crisis accelerated the erosion of the liberal world order, sharpened the antagonism between the great powers, especially the US and China, and highlighted the vulnerability of the production chains that had been outsourced to the Far East in the hope of cheap labour. Crisis scenarios and forecasts were drawn up, and prominent scientists and researchers expressed the view that there would be no return to the world before the virus. The virus crisis has also highlighted the failure of governments that have not invested in community infrastructure and have neglected public knowledge. It has also shown that government institutions need experts, not loyal mamelukes, to solve public policy problems arising from the crisis. The coronavirus is the most pressing challenge of this century so far, and in responding to it, localism is being valorised as a crucial centre of solidarity and problem-solving. Forecasters fear that rising inequalities and the erosion of family savings could trigger a wave of political discontent that is more angry and violent than ever before. The majority of people will not be able to manage their children’s digital education and work from home without a separate room and computing infrastructure, so governments will need to develop special programmes to address this, and people’s health and the capacity of public health to cope will come to the fore. The pandemic crisis has provided a new argument for those who argued for the reinvention of the state and the importance of governments’ ability to act quickly to deal effectively with natural and economic crises. In recent decades, many have buried the nation state, arguing that successful responses to global problems in a globalised world cannot be found within the framework of a nation state. The Covid-19 crisis has shown that the nation state remains the first front line for effective action against a crisis that is spreading at an unprecedented global scale and speed. Different countries have followed different crisis management strategies and very significant differences in contagion rates have emerged. The crisis has reassessed the role of nation states and borders, which already played an important role in receiving migration flows.


Author(s):  
Hakkı Çiftçi ◽  
Murat Koç

The World Political Atlas has been reorganized, the direction of this reorganization is determined by shared sovereignty reflexes, and is applied through strategic decisions. Metropolitan and hinterland borders form the backbone of the newly formed world political atlas Various western- (or the US) origin approaches such as “Neo Liberal Colonialism” , The Clashes of Civilizations”, “The End of History”, and Eurasian Sovereignty”, introduced as the application components of the framework of sovereignty, attract particular attention as the primary sources of the newly formed political atlas . Within the embracing scope of the concept of globalization, “The new World Order” formed through a new political atmosphere with such concepts and claims as “postmodernism”, neo-liberalism”, “the end of history”, and “the cashes of civilizations” can neither maintain its validity nor is wholly embracing in its attempt to perceive the political future of the world . Instead of establishing a comprehensive reconciliatory platform, all of these concepts and claims reflect enormous controversy due to their characteristics leading to constant arguments and, therefore, result in new conflicts, new political actors, new relations of power, and new searches for sovereignty. New “geopolitical gaps” constitute the focus of sovereignty and power relations of the new process.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document