Jeffrey Sachs 美国政治结果现在很糟糕

杰弗里·萨克斯:  美国政治结果现在很糟糕

Jeffrey Sachs, US political outcome is bumb now

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgsLijX32tI&ab_channel=FinanceCritics

April 3, 2024

[中东]

中国正在介入美国破坏稳定的政策，而且这种政策具有破坏性； 中国在中东的某些情况下正在介入； 作为和平缔造者，而且成本更低； 如果我们能够很好地实现和平，这可能是近年来最引人注目的外交成就； 我想说的是，中国是在促成沙特阿拉伯和伊朗之间达成和平协议吗？ 在美国人看来，这两个国家是不共戴天的敌人。 他们永远不会同意并支持美国； 伊朗是敌人，沙特阿拉伯是盟友； 但美国外交政策的整体理念是，你将各国作为美国的盟友置于你的管辖之下； 就像沙特阿拉伯一样，你在另一边与你的敌人作战； 但中国却有不同的看法，沙特和伊朗之间的分歧并没有根本原因； 但他们有充足的合作理由； 一方面，他们都受到气候变化的严重打击； 他们需要合作； 因为水危机相当严重； 它们都是碳氢化合物经济体； 他们需要能源转型，这是非常深刻的，因此中国人促成了两者之间的和解； 我很高兴通过苦涩之间的斗争方式和解； 伊朗和沙特阿拉伯之间分裂了西亚； 它导致了也门一场绝对毁灭性的战争； 美国提供的军事支持导致大量人员死亡； 它稳定了一个需要大量经济转型和技术升级和变革的地区；
因此，这项协议对整个地区来说确实是一个很大的帮助，不仅是对所涉及的两个国家，而且在我看来，中国获得了很多赞誉，因为它有智慧看到这场冲突是可以解决的，而不仅仅是加剧； 但美国的做法始终是推动它，即使美国与伊朗达成协议； 美国政府放弃了名为《联合全面行动计划》的核协议； 然后维持对伊朗的制裁； 因为美国并不真正认真地致力于和平； 大多数时候，它都有美国对抗他们的心态； 我发现这极具破坏性，不符合美国的利益； 是的; 我希望中方能够保持这一明智的做法； 因为台湾现在发生的事情很危险，这有助于了解你们之间的代理人战争和中国可能发生的事情之间的情况； 台湾的局势就像乌克兰的局势一样，非常具有爆炸性，非常危险，需要冷静的头脑来避免冲突； 事实是，实际上所有三个政府； 我想说的是，美国、台湾和中国有一个中国的政策； 无论是台湾政府还是北京政府，他们都说有一个中国，他们对1949年发生的事情有不同意见； 以及中国应该如何治理； 但他们没有说有两个国家，美国在与中华人民共和国建交时就非常明确地说，只有一个中国，有一个对华政策，那就是如何维护和平并确保 北京和台北之间的紧张关系不会演变成公开冲突； 但美国却开始玩弄这个； 开始与台湾形成实际上的军事同盟，真正进入一国中间的军事同盟； 这是一件极其危险和不谨慎的事情，拜登开始谈论我们将如何保卫台湾，而美国政客则谈论战争是如何发生的

China're stepping in where America is policy of destabilizing and it's a destructive; China in some cases in the Middle East is stepping in; as a
peacemaker and it's less expensive; if we can achieve peace well probably the most remarkable diplomatic achievement of recent years; I would say is China
brokering a peace agreement between Saudi Arabia and Iran; in the American
idea those two countries were implacable foes; they could never agree and for the United States; Iran was the enemy and Saudi Arabia was the Ally; but the whole idea of US foreign policy is you bring countries under your Authority as
an ally of the United States; like Saudi Arabia and you fight your enemies on the
other side; but China has a different idea, which is that Saudi Arabia and Iran had no fundamental reasons for this dissension; but they have plenty of reasons for cooperation; for one thing they're both being hard hit by climate change; they need to cooperate; because the Water Crisis is quite severe; they're both hydrocarbon economies; they need an energy transformation, which is very profound, and so the Chinese facilitated a Reconciliation between the two; I'm very happy about that reconciliation by the way the fighting between the bitterness; between Iran and Saudi Arabia divided Western Asia; it contributed to a absolutely devastating war in Yemen; in which the United States gave its military support that killed a lot of people; and it d stabilized a region that
needs a lot of economic transformation and technological upgrading and change;
and so this agreement is really a big help for the whole region not only for the two countries involved and China gets a lot of credit in my view for having the wisdom to see that was a conflict that could be solved not just exacerbated; but the US approach was always to push at it, even when the US made an agreement with Iran; the the nuclear agreement called the jcpoa the US government walked away from it; and then it maintained sanctions on Iran; because the US is not really serious at making peace; most of the time it's got it US versus them mentality; and I find that very destructive and not in the US interest; yes; and I hope that China maintains this sensible approach; because it's dangerous what's happening now in Taiwan and just help understand the situation like in that through line between you these proxy wars and what could happen in China; well the situation in Taiwan is like the situation in Ukraine very explosive, very dangerous and requires cool heads to avoid a conflict; the fact of the matter is that actually all three governments; let me say the United States Taiwan and China have a policy that there's one China; and whether it is the government in Taiwan or the government in Beijing they both say there's one China they disagree on what happened in 1949; and how China should be governed; but they don't say there are two countries and the United States when it established diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China very clearly said that there is one China and has one China policy and that is how to keep peace and to make sure that this tension between Beijing and taipe does do not boil over to open conflict; but the United States started to play games with this; it started to form a military alliance with Taiwan in effect, which is really coming into a military Alliance in the middle of one country; and this is an extremely dangerous and imprudent thing to do and Biden starts talking about how we're going to defend Taiwan and the American politicians talk about how a war is

我发现这个问题的核心有两个因素，一个是二战后； 美国与中央情报局和其他据称确保国家安全的机构建立了一个安全国家； 但实际上; 他们确实削弱了民主。

因为中央情报局的首要原则就是保密，行动保密； 它在世界各地做了很多不好的事情； 但它们是秘密的，所以这确实破坏了美国的民主； 我们对外交政策没有太大的公共影响力； 例如在美国，因为真正涉及外交政策时； 总统和其他一些人在没有公开辩论或不受任何真正民主机构控制的情况下代表所有人做出决定； 除了每隔几年投票一次之外； 但这还不够，因为我们一直在为损害美国人民的利益而发动战争； 这是问题的一部分，我之前提到的问题的另一部分是政治中的大笔资金； 一些国家限制私人竞选融资； 事实上，大多数欧洲国家的政治制度并没有太多腐败现象； 但美国； 我认为这是一种合法的腐败； 法律是合法的，因为我们的最高法院规定，公司可以在政治上为所欲为； 没有限制和/或很少的限制； 结果就是我们的选举周期； 2024 年大选将花费大约 1150 亿美元的竞选资金； 现在你找不到一个有这么多钱的诚实政府； 易手后，你会得到出价最高者购买的政府，这就是为什么对民主的信心大幅下降的原因； 你当然提到了大资金的力量我我不会对欧洲的情况那么乐观； 我只是相信，因为经济疲软； 然后没有美国那么多钱； 但实际的趋势是； 你提到的乔·拜登，当然，当时的特朗普总统可能会在明年的选举中见面； 您可能看到了领导力危机吗？ 因为当我们回顾过去时，我们看到许多来自欧洲和美国的强有力的领导人，他们能够提供一些愿景和领导社会，其中一些人甚至致力于建立一个和平的社会；

I find two factors that are at the core of this one is that after World War II; the
United States created a Security State with the CIA and other
institutions that were supposedly ensuring National Security; but in fact;
they really diminished democracy.

Because the first principle of the CIA is that it's secret and its actions are secret;  and it does lots of things around the world that are not good; but they're secret so this really undermined American democracy; and we don't have much
public effect on foreign policy; for example in the United States because
when it comes to foreign policy really; the president and a few other people
make decisions on behalf of everybody without public debate or without control
by any really Democratic institutions; other than a vote once every few years; but that's not enough because we go to war all the time against the interests of the American people;  so that's one part of the problem the other part of the problem that I mentioned earlier is the big money in politics;  some countries restrict private campaign financing; in fact most in Europe don't have a lot of Corruption of the political system; but the United States; I regard as kind of legal corruption; legal in the sense that our Supreme Court said that companies can spend whatever they want on politics; no restriction and or few restrictions; and the result is our election cycle say; the 2024 election will spend maybe1 15
billion dollars of campaign financing; now you don't get honest government with so much money; Changing Hands you get government that is purchased by the highest bidder and this is H why the confidence in democracy has declined so much; you mentioned of course the power of big money I I I wouldn't be so optimistic about the situation in Europe; I just believe because the economies are weaker; then there's not so much money as in the US; but the tendency is practically; the same you mentioned Joe Biden and of course then president Trump probably will meet in in elections next year; probably do you see the crisis in leadership; because when we look into past we see many strong leaders who were both from Europe from the United States, who were able to offer some vision and leader Society, some of them even towards a peaceful Society; 

杰弗里·萨克斯 (Jeffrey Sachs)：美国政治结果现在很糟糕

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgsLijX32tI&ab_channel=FinanceCritics

2024 年 4 月 3 日

好吧，我想说美国民主的质量已经下降, 在我的一生中，嗯，也许这是一种幻觉，但我感觉到了，而且, 我甚至从数据中就可以看出，60年来人们对政府的信心增强了
比他们今天更早，我看着那个，我当然已经花了我的全部时间
生活试图理解人们对我们政府的信心不断下降，我发现
呃，这个问题的核心有两个因素，那就是二战后
美国与中央情报局和其他机构建立了一个安全国家
据称是确保国家安全的机构，但实际上
他们确实削弱了民主，因为中央情报局的首要原则是
它是秘密的，它的行动也是秘密的，它做了很多事情
世界不好但它们是秘密所以这真的被破坏了
美国民主，嗯，我们没有，我们没有太多
公共对外交政策的影响，例如在美国，因为
当谈到外交政策时，确实是总统和其他一些人
在没有公开辩论或不受控制的情况下代表所有人做出决定
除了一次投票之外的任何真正民主的机构
每隔几年，但这还不够，因为我们一直在为反对美国的利益而进行战争
人们嗯，所以这是问题的一部分，我之前提到的问题的另一部分是个大问题
政治资金一些国家限制私人竞选资金
事实上，欧洲大多数国家的政治制度并没有太多腐败现象，但是
我认为美国的腐败是合法的，因为
我们最高法院说企业可以在政治上为所欲为
没有限制或很少限制，结果就是我们的选举周期
2024 年选举可能会花费 1 15
十亿美元的竞选资金现在你得不到诚实的政府有这么多钱易手你得到
政府是由最高出价者购买的，这就是为什么
对民主的信心已经下降了很多，你当然提到了大国的力量
钱我我我不会对欧洲的情况那么乐观我只是相信因为经济疲软
那么呃，那里没有美国那么多钱，但是趋势实际上呃几乎是一样的呃你你
提到了乔·拜登，当然，当时的特朗普总统可能会在
在明年的选举中，你可能会看到领导层的危机吗
因为当我们回顾过去时，我们看到许多强有力的领导人都来自
来自美国的欧洲人能够提供一些愿景和领导者社会，其中一些人甚至朝着
和平社会我们提到比尔品牌奥拉夫帕尔默我们也可以提到我们也可以提到拉尔德德兰呃作为
特殊类型的美国遗产以及呃我想说有一定的
这些领导力品质的下降你也这么认为吗，因为在
欧洲，我认为非常明显，是的，我认为政治质量
总体而言，目前美国和欧洲的领导力非常薄弱
美国呃我们有呃两位领先的候选人其中一位是81
他再也找不到离开舞台的路了，他碰巧是我们的总统，
另一个是被定罪的呃是被多重定罪的呃
呃呃心理不稳定的人呃现在面临几十个罪犯呃
现在在即将到来的审判中很重要，所以也许我们会有一个
八十多岁的老人谁不应该跑步，一个被定罪的重罪犯呃跑步
对于总统来说，这显然是一件可怕的事情呃
我们怎样才能到达那里还有其他一些候选人我希望罗伯特
小肯尼迪呃证明自己是一位非常有能力的候选人，我喜欢他
我们是同学我们是朋友呃呃他来自一个伟大的政治家
事实上，传统呃他的叔叔呃约翰·F·肯尼迪在我看来是最后一位伟大的人物
美国总统呃因为在那之后我们有一些
非常友善和聪明的人，少数人不多，吉米·卡特就是其中之一，但是嗯
我们有很多失败的总统和失败的总统任期，所以
领导力相当低，在欧洲这也让我感到惊讶
当美国做出如此糟糕的错误判断时，欧洲领导人往往会如何
跟随美国的领导，当然我对此非常不满意
乌克兰战争 我的意思是每个人都对此不满意，但我的观点与主流有所不同
在我看来，乌克兰战争是由美国引起的
想要扩大北约 呃，呃，当然呃
许多欧洲人说不不不，这都是普京的事，他这么做了，但我知道
足够多的历史，我参加了足够多的活动，知道美国有多少
通过绝对愚蠢的政策引发了这场战争，因为如果你聪明的话
你没有推动军事联盟对吧针对俄罗斯边境 呃，那是
俄罗斯对军事极其敏感并不是明智之举
西方国家正在侵占它，因为俄罗斯已经被侵略了多少次
西方，尤其是当美国政客拥有如此多的权力时
他们公开表达了对俄罗斯的敌意
应该拆除，还有许多其他事情，当然俄罗斯会将国家扩张视为对国家的直接威胁
国家安全不会让它发生，所以这只是一个例子
可怕的政策可预见的灾难
但美国现在同意了我的观点是欧洲人更清楚我
知道，因为很多欧洲人告诉过我很多次哦，北约向乌克兰扩张
非常危险，但他们不会在公共场合说出来，呃，呃，他们不会说出来
在公共场合，因为美国会生他们的气，你知道
他们害怕美国，他们不应该害怕美国，欧洲应该有自己独立的外交政策
它应该了解自己的利益呃而且利益不仅仅是
跟随美国所以这只是一个非常重要的
现在欧洲和美国政治领导层软弱的例子是的，我们我们
在这里看得很清楚，所以他们实际上甚至无法制定国家利益，我不知道是否
如果是恐惧或者只是他们无法理解正在发生的事情，那么可能是两者的结合
当然，你提到的后果对欧盟在经济和政治上都是灾难性的
一位一位欧洲政治领导人几年前对我说，哦，他们
不要在华盛顿认真对待我们，嗯，他说得更厉害
色彩缤纷，我不会完全重复，但呃这是一个专业的领导者
国家，我的想法是是的，但你不应该让自己受到对待
那样的话，那是你的错，不是美国的错，是的，美国很傲慢
但为欧洲挺身而出，呃，这应该是方法，但不是
方法，因为我认为我们已经为 aan 涵盖了很多基础，并且我们已经听到了
很多事情都非常有前途，这很好，因为我们需要一些呃
乐观和一些方向
呃如何克服一些重大挑战
现在如果我们退后一步
危机，看看呃一些非常
嗯世界的基本趋势我们有很多理由
乐观事实上呃世界经济和世界社会作为一个整体已经变得
毫无疑问，预期寿命比 100 年前好得多
世界收入显着增加
如果按以下标准衡量，现在平均每人 20,000 美元
国际价格，如果按市场价格计算，每人约 122,000 美元
这是收入的巨大增长
健康和呃饮食质量
医疗保险的保护以及许多其他的确实
我们物质生活的基本组成部分以及肖博士对中国的描述
这对 40 年来的 14 亿人来说绝对是不可思议的
嗯，虽然没有完全按照这个速度实现，但在许多方面都取得了非常广泛的成就
世界以及这些进步的根本原因是科学
技术知识已经进步并继续进步，即使在
加速速度所以我们有能力
解决实际挑战确实是前所未有的，现在我们的财富是
史无前例，我们的专业知识也是史无前例的，这确实是
对我们能做什么以及做什么非常乐观的根本原因
我们在未来几年应该做的事情是，我们学到的是
至少有三三
世界运作方式的根本问题，这就是带来的
我们参加这次研讨会以及是什么让我们实现了可持续发展目标
首先，随着所有这些进步，还有数十亿人
那些实际上已经落后于这一进步的人
由于各种原因人们生活在更偏远的地方
地区或地理位置非常不利或属于少数群体的一部分
在社会中受到虐待的群体或一半人口是妇女
传统上不属于市场经济的女孩现在是市场经济的一部分
家庭经济确实取得了进步，但面临着
今天仍然存在许多社会障碍，这就是为什么可持续发展之一
发展目标专门针对性别问题
SG5 所以三个巨大的挑战之一是我们拥有一个富裕的世界和很多
那个世界上非常贫穷和受苦受难的人们，那就是
呃我认为对于我们大多数人来说
这是不可接受的，事实上，当联合国成立时
1948年所有成员国一致认为应该制定基本标准
地球上每个人的生活，因为他们是地球上的人
因为他们是人类，而世界的生产力足以确保
每个人都有尊严，这就是为什么要制定《世界人权宣言》人权
已被通过，我认为我们仍在努力履行该宣言，该宣言似乎
我是基本点，所以第一个问题就是
发展不平衡的事实仍然存在
今天，世界上有很大一部分人生活在非常贫困的境地
剥夺，这是第一个挑战，我认为
这在道德上可能是头号挑战，因为极端贫困
一个丰盛的世界绝对是呃
如果我们不解决这个问题，就会破坏我们全人类，所以这就是为什么
可持续发展目标 1 是赤贫问题，而可持续发展目标 2 是
第二要务是结束饥饿，当然还有很大的挑战
如何做到这一点，但我会说，在一个财富和知识的世界里，这是
绝对触手可及，如果平均收入是
人均 112,000 美元 有些人的生活水平只有 100 美元，而
世界还在继续，他们受苦、英年早逝、面临可怕的困难
第二个大挑战 巨大的挑战 比第一关更难的谜题
第一个概念是我们在大约 50 年前发现的
我们经济发展的本质就是我刚才谈到的所有财富都是环境因素
具有破坏性，因为大肆吹嘘的经济
进程不关心它们的物理
副产品，其中一些不被理解
直到 50 或 100 年前，就像温室一样
气体及其对气候的影响需要科学的研究
突破了一个相当深的秩序，以了解它是在年底到来的
19世纪，然后至少花了75年的时间才创造出来
测量系统来验证科学，我们从 1980 年左右就或多或少地知道，人类确实是
以可能危险的方式改变气候，而我们仍在挣扎
有了这个事实，因为是什么首先给我们带来了财富
1800年代是化石燃料，然后我们发现了大约一半哦
这些都是危险的，不好的，所以这是第二个大问题是
我们有一个经济体系和一套法律规则和全球公域
公海和许多其他因素
我们的经济体系意味着呃现在的生产规模
自我毁灭，正如我所说，我们在理智上已经理解了这一点，至少 70 年，至少大约 50 年，嗯，它
第一次关于这一事实的会议是在 50 年前举行的
51 年前，第一本关于增长限制的好书问世
并明确表示确实存在问题，但我们尚未解决
这个问题，但让我像第一个一样规定以下内容
一 这些环境没有什么根本性的
即使以我们现有的知识库来看，挑战也超出了我们的解决方案
换句话说，我们已经在 2023 年拥有了技术范围
90%温室的解决方案
气体不是 100% 我们绝对不会
面临食物和自然之间的选择我们面临着呃之间的选择
破坏性和非破坏性粮食生产之间存在很大差异
这是我 40 年来在这方面的工作中从未找到过的选择
经济福祉和环境的根本障碍
可持续性，所以我不属于去增长学派，它说
我们真正需要的是扭转经济发展，而不是所有经济发展
发展有利于人类福祉，这是另一回事，但我不同意我们已经
创造了一种完全
不符合我们的环境
我们所拥有的必需品或我们的环境福祉或健康是
经济体系法律体系监管存在很大缺陷
系统激励结构，以便我们采用或继续采用以下技术：
非常不明智，做了很多愚蠢的事情，因为可以从这些愚蠢的事情中赚钱
而不是做我们应该做的事情，而我在我的所有经历中都没有看到过
经历过的任何计算都表明，做正确的事情超出了我们的能力范围
超出我们的预算超出我们的经济
意味着例如关于能量转换为a的所有估计
零碳能源系统表明，世界产出的 1% 或 2%
需要做出改变，这真的很奇怪，不是
需要的是世界产出的 50%，但这并不是说
灾难性的昂贵，我们注定会像小行星一样
即将撞击地球，我们无事可做，不，我们已经清楚非常非常清楚
要做的事情有时我们有太多的可能性
要做的事情，所以我们不知道该选择哪一个，所以我们陷入瘫痪，应该选择风能、太阳能还是
核或这个我不知道我们现在不会做任何事情我们正在赚钱
我们正在做的事情让我们陷入瘫痪，或者我们知道该怎么做，但有
强大的既得利益者说不要这样做，因为我在短期内赚了太多钱
做破坏性的事情或者事情很复杂并且没有被考虑过
出去正确的是，因为这是绝对新的东西
建造燃煤电厂很简单，但也许没那么简单
由于存储或其他原因而建造海上风力或太阳能发电场或其他设施
其他问题，所以它们只是复杂性，但这是第二大问题
我们面临的挑战类别是经济
环境碰撞过程再次需要分析，然后需要
询问问题对我来说有多深以及问题的可解决性如何，所以
气候危机非常严重，但也相当严重
可以解决，有一些谜题绝对应该是什么大海洋
油轮运行是否应该是氢燃料电池是否应该是氨应该
这是氢气燃烧我不是工程师我听过他们的争论
工程师 我希望他们奋力拼搏 我希望他们尝试不同的方式
方法，但显然我们应该在第三次尝试这些技术
大挑战，亘古不变的挑战
我们似乎很难停止互相残杀
其他因此战争变得更加危险
因为武器变得更具破坏性，现在我们
技术如此聪明，以至于我们想出了如何摧毁整个
该死的人类，如果我们不那么聪明，我们就不会拥有这个
麻烦，但一些天才发现你可以让核捕鱼发挥作用
顺便说一句，世界上大概有 50 个人制造了一颗炸弹
理解了这一点，他们弄清楚了，然后他们把它交给了一个世界
白痴，所以我们有很多愚蠢的人负责核武器和
它们是由一些天才制作的，这是我们的问题，所以这是我们的第三期
在我看来，如何保持平和与合作是三大要素
我们面临的问题是如何做到公平和体面
对于那些正在遭受苦难的人们，如何确保我们不会
自我毁灭，因为我们的经济体系实际上是一套复杂的体系
激励措施并不能把事情做好，我们的方法也没有什么魔力
组织我们的经济生活来处理温室气体等问题
不在亚当·斯密的《国富论》中，也不属于
呃，自由市场可以解决的事情等等，第三个是这个
这是一个无休无止的问题，如果你读过人类历史，我们大部分时间都在互相争斗，但也有
也有一线希望，希望有长期的和平，我们也有
和平机构就像我们有战争机构一样，这是让我感到自豪的事情之一
对中国崛起相当乐观的一点是，中国在政治上更加和平。
历史比世界上任何其他地区都要悠久，而且
中国过去2000年的国家间战争实际上是相当低的
基本上是来自北方的牧民的战争
久坐不动的农民试图将它们击退，呃，这就是中国的大部分
2000年的战争如果你看看欧洲的战争，那就是跨越分水岭互相残杀
一千年不间断，所以中国至少有一个和平的
我觉得这个传统很符合和谐社会的理念
对于全球文明等等的想法，我是一个相当乐观的人
不得不说这一点，因为我认为呃实际上有一个很深的
扎根，这就是我们消除贫困所要做的一切
保护环境停止互相残杀好吗
所以谢谢你 不行 那我们该怎么办
在我看来，最基本的事情是我们应该认真考虑其中的每一个
然后提出最基本的计划
这个想法听起来很愚蠢，为什么我要这么说
40 年后我没有什么更明智的话要说，事情是
我们的社会系统运作的方式不是思考然后解决
这些事情非常有趣，我们的经济体系是
围绕不同的原则设计，即让人们做什么
他们想要致富，去找你的工作，呃，买你想要的东西
想要但不解决问题，因此在经济领域它不面向
解决问题，以做企业应该做的事情为导向
为了盈利，我们应该成为好的消费者，我们应该在我们追求的工作中聪明，但是
至少在市场经济中是这样的
盎格鲁撒克逊世界的主导意识形态
那么这个世界不是为了解决问题而是去做你的事所以不要
期望这些问题的答案来自经济领域
或者从商界来看，他们的工作不是经营一家企业，而是
赚钱所以这是第一个问题
我们不考虑经济领域的最终目标，我们应该只是
做我们的事，然后大多数政治中的政客都不是
关于解决问题，这是关于维护
权力，这甚至是目标，你有维持权力的专家
政客们身边有小人物，他们告诉他们，这就是你要留在英国所需要做的
力量，这就是你的目标所以政治至少在我看来
这个国家与任何目标都没有什么关系 我不知道美国人会做什么
目标是我们没有目标我们有一些英雄我们的成立
父亲们，我们热爱宪法，我们喜欢 7 月 4 日独立日，但我们没有
目标，甚至当我听到肖博士谈论中国的
你不可能在美国实现这些目标
目标，因为就是那样
社会主义呃你不被允许有目标所以政治没有导向
真正解决问题的关键在于权力的管理
权力竞争 掌握权力 从权力中受益，所以我们
大多数时候我们的政府没有看到这些大目标以及如何实现
解决这些问题 我真的认为中国在过去 40 年的这个时期有所不同
与大多数其他政府相比，我认为成功就是这样的结果
事实上，这确实是，为什么我认为这个问题非常有趣，但是
嗯，一些国家有时有非常明确的目标，也许是因为
生存也许是因为他们过去的历史也许因为他们有
成功的呃邻居呃所以他们想模仿成功也许就像
新加坡因为有一位天才来了 leuan Yu，他有一个非常非常清晰的想法
真正的新加坡，这是一位非常清晰、才华横溢的思想家的案例
他只是像柏拉图的哲学家国王一样指导了很长一段时间，但大多数
现在政治不是这样的
所以我们没有看到很多这个问题的解决来自
政府，第三件事是在我国，它成为最
过去75年军事上一直是世界强国
他们确实认为打仗是治理的重要组成部分
疯狂又危险，可能会害死我们所有人
被杀，以便第三类正义和平合作不会到来
我们每天都很容易在美国报纸上读到一些仇恨中国的内容
现在我每天都读报纸
今天中国有全球文明倡议，精彩你讲到了
今天我刚读到这太可怕了这是你知道的中国的出处
老实说，现在通过这种方式在世界范围内，这是一种心态
非常非常深，可能在下雨的时候
我们的进化也因为可能曾经有一段时间，无论谁都可以
控制下一个水坑就可以生存，不控制的人就无法生存，这是
我们或他们，现在的世界不是这样的，我们不是我们，也不是他们
不需要占据任何其他地方来享受幸福期，没有
客厅的危机只有理解的危机，不杀戮的危机
另一边好吧，那么我们该怎么做才能得出结论我们需要
想想清楚，对不起，这是一个技术问题
关于美国政治的术语所以我们真的需要把
详细提出严肃的想法
这就是我们所追求的目的以及我们所追求的两条具体途径
现在真正关注的是能源转型，因为只有一个
四分之一个世纪，能源系统非常复杂，你必须有动力
电网我们必须将所有车辆转换为电动或氢或某些
建筑部门必须远离其他非排放源
更高效的工业排放大量温室气体 森林砍伐换句话说
实现净零排放是一项相当复杂的挑战，需要解决很多问题
移动部件，它是一大笔钱，最多不过是一个能源系统
成本，但能源系统每年花费数万亿美元，因此值得获得
是的，这是第一个路径，第二个是土地
使用和海洋使用，因为我们
真的非常接近摧毁一切
不可逆转的是，当物种消失时，它就永远不会再来
当生态系统退化时，许多生态系统再也不会回来
如果我们超过了气候阈值，我们将在下一个世纪度过
灾难性的海平面上升、风暴、热浪等等灾难，所以我们
非常接近，所以这些是我们真正的两条主要途径
专注于生物及其相关
与粮食生产和其他农业生产的联系
对于这个地区来说，这是中心，因为这是一个生物多样性呃伊甸园，也是
生物多样性严重受到威胁的地区，所有这些美丽和
它正在被拆除，而且发生得如此之快
因为现在经济非常非常非常大
并要求中国仅仅因为其对热带地区的需求就可以砍伐这个国家的森林
硬木没有问题，除非你小心，所以这些是我们的两个领域
我真的想重点关注，我想说的最后一点是
这第三类合作恰巧是当你从技术角度审视能源计划或
在生态系统计划中，任何国家都无法做到
这本身除了地方一级之外无能为力，但计划需要
毫无疑问是跨国的
有很多地方行动，但它们必须成为更广泛行动的一部分
框架，这就是为什么这是一个人工智能研讨会，因为一个计数里斯不是
只在地图上在一起，不仅是物理邻居，而且还有工作要做
共同努力，因为阿桑国家如果不努力就无法实现其目标
一起，所以我们需要在跨国规划层面上做到这一点，这很难
因为没有民选跨国官员
在任何地方，所有跨国组织都是软弱的，因为它们都没有能力
军队中没有人有我们组织的政治领导人
世界上国家级的物质力量
谎言，然而这就是政治普遍存在的地方，但我们有
急需解决的全球和地区问题不是
一次将拯救一个国家，将由中国老挝人民民主共和国拯救
柬埔寨越南合作毫无疑问是没有办法的
一次一个国家必须在能源分水岭完成
马来西亚的系统绝对需要与其他国家整合
地区和那些地区机构在政治上薄弱
组织上需要大大加强，然后
呃，哪个地区是我们正在处理的问题的正确地区的问题
aan 因为它是一个重要的建立区域实体，但我昨天说过
我再说一遍，我认为对于能源行业来说 ARP 更合适
这还包括阿桑加上中国、日本、韩国、澳大利亚和新西兰
美国会大发雷霆，我会一气呵成
一旦美国对你与中国的合作感到不满
我强烈建议你与中国密切合作，我的
对澳大利亚的强烈建议是不要与合作建立潜艇基地
中国，我们现在不要在核潜艇上浪费钱，并筹集资金
压力更大，所以我自己的建议是更广泛
我希望印度加入这个集团，然后我们就能以一种实际上可以让世界上很多国家团结起来的方式
解决了问题，很抱歉这么长时间的漫无目的，但我相信所有的
这些问题是可以解决的 我相信大学有其独特的和
在这方面发挥极其重要的作用，因为这就是我们应该做的
开展培训、教学、教育、研究
政策分析并真正努力制定
政治以应有的方式运作，这是为了共同利益，谢谢
你现在的政治结果不是我们想要的，但我们太愚蠢了
不接受更好的交易 一年前 两年前 五年前 十年前
现在我们所处的情况是我们无法得到我们所引用的想要的东西
但继续战斗绝对会摧毁甚至
更让我担心的是，乌克兰人的生活真的很糟糕。
只是被视为一个伤亡者，甚至不值得谈论
他们甚至不谈论这个，领导绝对是粗俗的，你知道
我看我确信辛宁斯基处境非常艰难，但他所说的一切
现在正在把更多的生命扔进坟墓，坦率地说，没有策略，没有
自我意识 没有情境意识 好吧，这很可悲，因为
美国说服他放弃 2022 年 3 月的和平协议
泽林斯基的机会，他失去了，他缺乏经验，你知道，当你
美国来告诉你，我们支持你，你知道，如果你没有经验，你往往会相信我
我试图用这种方式告诉他们我你知道我我真的试图告诉乌克兰人我是一个老家伙我一直都是
经过很多美国战争越南战争尼加拉瓜海湾战争叙利亚他们
永远不会赢，你在开玩笑吗，你真的想像阿富汗那样结束吗？他们不相信我，他们只是想哦
你是普京的辩护者，所以他们不想听到这些，但我正在告诉他们残酷的事实
美国的战争，他们不想听，除了俄罗斯，我不确定
乌克兰实际上是美国政策中的一个大话题，我不确定
你肯定知道这是一个重点
政治阶层仍然是军事工业联合体和白人
众议院可能只是出于政治原因，拜登不想承认
他是个糟糕的扑克玩家，但重点是对美国人民来说
他们已经受够了，没有足够的支持，人们不想要这样
他们想阻止这件事所以从这个意义上说你是绝对正确的
通常公众对此没有太多发言权，我们几乎没有公开辩论，但拜登的受欢迎程度确实很高
崩溃了，如果呃对拜登外交政策的不满非常非常
很清楚，所以也许公众舆论也会开始发挥作用，因为
我们现在正处于选举年，我想请你澄清一下
对中国的立场，因为当我观察共和党或民主党时，我会说他们的观点
对中国的看法非常相似，所以他们实际上对中国抱有非常敌视的看法
中国呃现在有一个峰会呃猿，拜登总统和
钦宁会面，嗯，你看到紧张局势有任何减弱吗？有任何希望吗？
实际上他们的关系是亲的可能不会很友好，但我们可以说至少稳定并且会更少
威胁较小 我会告诉你一件有趣的事情，当习主席来到这次峰会时
在旧金山他会见了 200 位美国商界领袖，他们给了他一个地位
鼓掌 我不认为他们会给美国总统起立鼓掌，但他们给了习主席起立鼓掌
欢呼为什么中国是他们最大的市场他们都在中国生产
在中国销售，他们在中国赚了很多钱，他们想要正常的关系
发生的事情有两件事，一是我们有一种安全级别
美国，呃，都是关于美国的
美国霸权 美国成为第一，这很奇怪
一群人呃，但这是我们的外交政策机构，那么我们
有些政治家基本上是这么认为的，而且这是非常特别的
2016年，特朗普通过赢得中期摇摆州赢得大选
美国在美国中西部，这是我们的工业区，他通过以下方式赢得了它
说中国抢走了你的工作，当他在这些领域取得微弱胜利时
民主党说我们必须攻击中国才能竞争
政治上与特朗普的关系因此有两个原因
美国及其政治阶层的反华情绪
一个是美国是你所了解的唯一主导国家的想法
知道除非你玩像《风险游戏》这样的棋盘游戏，否则你无法成为世界上的主导国家
当周围有其他大国时，这又是一个非常时期
误导了这种保护主义政治，呃试图吸引一个
美国选举中很少有摇摆州，其结果是政治
民主党和共和党都非常团结地反对中国
根据我的经验，他们无知，他们不了解中国，他们不了解中国历史，他们没有任何观点
他们玩的是危险的游戏，就像我们的众议院议长南希·佩洛西一样
飞到台湾太愚蠢了抱歉
只是你为什么要招惹另一个超级谢谢你这么说因为
我们有同样的代表也在这方面挑衅中国
好吧，不要激怒中国，要尊重，保持正常关系，不要激怒
一个超能力为什么里面有什么可以戳
超级大国，这是愚蠢的人们应该认为你知道是否有
有些即使你认为存在恶霸，而中国没有，但如果你认为校园里有恶霸，
你是一个你认识的小孩，你认为他们是恶霸，去戳他们并说你是恶霸真的很聪明吗？
你是个恶霸，我恨你，不，你最终会受伤，所以你需要
一些常识，中国甚至没有欺负中国只是大成功
动态实际上是欧洲的良好贸易伙伴，所以我们应该正常尊重它，呃美国
焦虑不应该成为欧洲的焦虑，这是另一个领域
欧洲政客只是重复美国政客的话
你知道我知道在幕后虽然很明显你知道为什么
范德兰几乎像拜登一样重复单词
因为她觉得她的工作就是和美国在一起也许她希望
美国任命她为北约秘书长或其他什么我不知道是什么但就是这样
她所希望的也许就是欧洲犯了这样的大错误
确实在乌克兰犯了一个大错误，试图与中国为敌也会犯一个大错误，这是一个
完全荒谬的失败提议呃我的最后一个问题因为
我们的时间即将到来，我必须反映您已经提到的一件当前事件，那就是呃选举
阿根廷 是的，因为我们可以说，当选的总统是不寻常的
个性 嗯你如何看待这种情况 嗯是否有危险
砖头或者也许对于其他拉丁美洲国家来说他很奇怪
关于外交政策和经济的建议 是的，当然时间会证明一切
有一件事是他赢得了总统职位，但对国会没有控制权
他的小政党，至少目前国会中没有任何形式的执政联盟，所以
也许他的呃做事能力需要更广泛的联盟
力量，这可能是一个限制，但我首先要说的是，阿根廷是一个
整个历史上一直不稳定的国家
1820 年代，自从独立以来，阿根廷就搞乱了更多的货币，有更多的货币
通货膨胀和比整个地球上任何其他地方都更加不稳定
这家伙获胜不是因为他所说的话，而是因为对即将离任的人的厌恶
政府的通胀率达到三位数，超过
当通货膨胀达到三位数时，你 100% 不可能真正赢得选举，而我
非常了解阿根廷呃并且实际上与财政部合作过
部长就在这之前，他最终做得很好，他
最终没有被逼出来他不幸辞职了呃bu这
辞职是因为他自己的腐败政客
他自己的政党呃拒绝他试图推行的正常政策
推动阿根廷现在陷入又一个不稳定的循环
作为一名经济学家的职业生涯 我一直惊讶地观察着阿根廷，因为
无论如何，这都不是一个贫穷的国家，而且你知道它是一个巨大的国家
自然财富和非常聪明的人，受过良好教育的人
但它一再造成政治混乱，这可能是又一个
我不想在选举后的第一天说这个人
他将真正控制他的竞选方式，因为有时他们会变得更加
有责任，但也有可能他就是他所说的那样
呃，阿根廷将面临一些真正的麻烦，我不认为是这样
遗憾的是，因为我是积木的粉丝，我希望看到它们发挥作用
阿根廷是砖头组的新成员呃不管这家伙是留在还是
从砖块中出来或被踢出砖块一切还有待观察呃但是我呃
我只希望这家伙把这个作为一个人格面具而不是一个
真正的政治，因为呃，他真正的政治呃，如果以这种方式表达的话
对阿根廷办事处非常非常不利
2021 年，他呼吁北约东扩，而不是试图缓和紧张局势
美国加大东扩力度 普京强烈回击
拜登反驳美国在2021年签署多项声明，确认北约
会放大 我认为这都是绝对不负责任的俄罗斯蒙面
向其边境派兵并将美俄安全草案摆上桌面
拜登在 2021 年 12 月 17 日在北约不扩大的基础上达成协议
政府正式回复称不愿意就此进行谈判
1 月份的回应中提出问题，然后俄罗斯于 2 月 24 日入侵
2022年明确表示未能就
北约问题是俄罗斯四周后行动的核心
换句话说，扎林斯基宣布乌克兰接受中立
俄罗斯最初的入侵将乌克兰带到了谈判桌前
3月下半月，土耳其政府担任调解人
俄罗斯与乌克兰达成和平协议，令人难以置信
阻止它是因为美国告诉乌克兰政府你继续战斗是因为美国决策者
有两个想法，一是乌克兰不应该保持中立，而应该成为一个
北约国家和第二，战争将通过某种组合来赢得
西方军备和金融制裁，因此美国加大了制裁力度
战争普京说不，我们不会袖手旁观，我们会战斗并动员了数百人
2022 年夏天，成千上万的俄罗斯人，从那时起，我们就一直走在一条路上
作为一名受到军事升级威胁的公民，我对这一事实感到不满
拜登没有就北约问题进行谈判，拜登和普京也没有谈过
据我们所知，自 2022 年 2 月 24 日以来，双方何时
他们需要谈判和谈判，但这遭到了强硬派的拒绝
美国纽兰·林肯·沙利文·拜登说为什么我们只是谈判
升级，我们将击败俄罗斯，在我看来，这是完全鲁莽和不负责任的，首先它会导致
乌克兰的毁灭，其次它有升级为核战争的风险，因此
我对此非常不满，也非常反感主流媒体
就像《纽约时报》一直在重复谎言，说这是一个
2022 年 24 日无端行动似乎希望我们没有任何
背景或历史，以了解冲突从何而来以及如何发生
像《纽约时报》这样的报纸有责任告诉人们
事实是，作为公民，他们并没有这样做，我们有权利，你知道
美国国家不关心其本国公民外出进行这些不负责任的战争的繁荣
当我们没有时间处理环境中的其他事情时，我讽刺的是，这一切背后似乎是这样的
坚持单极世界，坚持主导地位，而美国
希望保持其作为储备货币的地位，似乎在我们也受到的经济制裁下
甚至可能会加速其他国家货币的升值，基本点是美国
占世界人口4.1%怎么能称得上世界第一
你知道美国是一个强大的国家，一个富裕的国家，但它不运行
世界，它不应该渴望管理这个世界，这是一种疯狂
长期以来，美国的意识形态一直是美国应该统治世界
在我看来这令人难以置信，但话又说回来，我职业生涯的大部分时间都是在美国以外的地方度过的
世界上 95.9% 的人，我知道世界上其他 95% 的人不想要
美国统治世界，这并不反对美国，只是说让我们拥有自己的世界
不想让你统治这个世界，我们不想我们的政府是谁，我们是谁，我们如何统治，这不是你决定的
我们自己，你知道你只是一个地方，而美国领导人不知道
明白他们非常傲慢，他们非常无知，因为有两大洋，他们非常不了解
世界其他地区的历史，我们最终得到了这种傲慢和天真的结果
和危险的外交政策，因为毫无疑问美国是富有和强大的，它制造了很多
武器系统，我已经 68 岁了，美国几乎已经处于战争状态
我生命中的每一年都来自越南、洛杉矶、柬埔寨和尼加拉瓜
阿富汗、伊拉克、叙利亚、利比亚，现在还有乌克兰，来吧，休息一下，
美国也正在经历世界其他地方所面临的现实
追赶技术确实领先技术以及中国
非常成功、非常勤奋、非常勤奋的社会，在过去 40 年里
多年来从贫困变成了一个非常重要的世界重要经济体
美国很难接受美国的态度，如果你听的话
那些似乎什么都不知道的国会议员是哦，如果中国成功了，那一定是因为他们在欺骗什么
因为他们的储蓄占中国人民GDP的40%以上
致力于教育的显着升级
每年都会涌现出大量的科学研究项目，这就是
真相，所以这种傲慢不允许真相被揭露，但你提到了一个具体的点
美元的作用是二战后美国实力的一部分
美国基本上是唯一站立的经济体，它是世界上技术先进、富裕的大型经济体
最大的货币，而且美元确实是唯一的国际通用货币
很长一段时间以来，美元体系成为您进行国际贸易交易的中心
当您购买以美元支付的进口商品时，商品以美元计价
意味着您通常在美国银行系统中使用美元账户
交易是通过所谓的 Swift 银行间系统完成的，所以美国有一个什么
法国很久以前就称其可以印制大量货币是一种过高的特权，因为世界其他国家都
使用美元持有美元 美元是世界经济的基础
现在这种情况正在改变，改变的原因有三个：一是份额
美国在世界经济中的地位正在下降，这意味着
美国的主导地位必然会减弱，第二个是技术上的主导地位
除了通过美国银行和所谓的数字货币之外，结算还将以各种方式进行
特别是央行数字货币将意味着其他方式进行结算，我们将以人人结算
B 当我们在中国购买或以卢布结算或以卢比结算时贸易
印度等，所以会有多种货币，然后是第三部分，这确实是一个糟糕的问题
美国的一系列决策使美元军事化，这意味着
通常你会很好地考虑钱，你拥有它，你可以使用它，你可以花它，但美国已经开始说，如果
我们不喜欢你，如果你的钱存在我们的银行里，你就不一定能再取钱了，所以美国冻结了美元
美国冻结俄罗斯持有的美元 委内瑞拉美国持有的美元
冻结阿富汗的美元持有量我对任何与美国政府不和的政府的建议是
小心你的钱，因为美国可能会介入并冻结你的钱，所以各国都希望持有
他们以其他方式储备现在完全可以理解，我认为这是此举的另一部分
从以美元为基础的国际体系转向多货币国际体系
你提到了储备货币 REM 和 b 的可能性，所以还有其他东西不是
经常报道中国一号，我知道你也写过这件事，他们正在介入
美国的政策是破坏稳定的，在某些情况下，中国正在中东介入，成为破坏性的政策。
和平使者，如果我们能够很好地实现和平，那么代价可能会更小
我想说的是近年来取得的显着外交成就是中国
在美国促成沙特阿拉伯和伊朗之间的和平协议
认为这两个国家是不可调和的敌人，他们永远无法达成共识
美国伊朗是敌人，沙特阿拉伯是盟友，但整个
美国外交政策的理念是，你将国家置于你的管辖之下
像沙特阿拉伯这样的美国盟友，你在海上与你的敌人作战
但中方却有不同的看法，认为沙特和伊朗这样做没有根本原因。
存在分歧，但他们有充分的合作理由，因为他们都受到气候的严重打击
改变他们需要合作，因为水危机相当严重，它们都是碳氢化合物经济体，它们需要一个
能源转型是非常深刻的，因此中国人推动了
a 两者之间的和解 我对这次和解感到非常高兴
伊朗与沙特之间的苦战之路
它分裂了西亚，导致也门发生了一场绝对毁灭性的战争
美国提供的军事支持导致大量人员死亡，并稳定了该地区
需要大量的经济转型和技术升级和变革
所以这个协议对整个地区来说确实是一个很大的帮助，不仅是对相关两国和中国
在我看来，由于有智慧看到那是一个
本来可以解决的冲突不仅加剧了，而且美国的做法
即使美国与伊朗达成协议，也总是会推动它
美国政府放弃了名为《联合全面行动计划》的核协议
然后它继续对伊朗实施制裁，因为美国大多数时候并没有真正认真地缔造和平
这是美国与他们的心态，我发现这非常具有破坏性，而不是在
美国的利益是的，我希望中国保持这种明智的做法
因为台湾现在发生的事情很危险，只是帮助了解像直通电话那样的情况
你们之间的代理人战争以及中国可能发生的事情台湾的情况就像台湾的情况
乌克兰非常具有爆炸性，非常危险，需要冷静的头脑来避免
冲突事实是，实际上三个政府都让我
说美国台湾和中国有一个中国和一个中国的政策
无论是台湾政府还是北京政府，他们都说有一个中国，他们不同意
关于1949年发生的事情以及应该如何治理中国，但他们没有说有两个国家和美国
各国在与中华人民共和国建交时都明确表示，
一个中国，一个中国政策，那就是如何维护和平，使
确保北京和台北之间的紧张关系不会爆发
但美国却开始玩弄这个游戏，并开始与台湾结成军事同盟。
真正进入军事联盟的效果
国家，这是一件极其危险和不谨慎的事情
拜登开始谈论我们将如何保卫台湾，而美国政客则谈论战争是如何发生的
来吧，这一切都是鲁莽、不负责任的，我们应该做的是
试图减少紧张局势 通过谈判化解紧张局势 通过对话 通过和平
建立想法，而不是煽动某些冲突是不可避免的想法
冲突当然首先对台湾来说是毁灭性的，但
实际上对于全世界来说，所以需要避免这种情况，我们需要冷静的头脑，我们不应该有美国人
政客们剑拔弩张，我们不应该让纳粹佩洛西议长飞往台湾
在中国政府一再表示不做、不挑衅、不挑衅之后
冲突本来不必发生，但美国领导层并没有很好地倾听
同样的事情，当普京多次说过不要将北约扩大到
乌克兰美国哦抱歉我们听不到你的声音那是你无话可说那不是你的
生意兴隆，然后战争来临，这是非常典型的美国外交政策
因为美国外交政策领导人太傲慢，他们不听
是的，现在古巴导弹危机已经过去 61 年了，你认为我们吸取了教训，当然美国永远不会
接受一个军事联盟就在它的家门口，你知道，比如来自加拿大或类似的地方
1960年古巴与苏联结盟时，美国的想法就是入侵
就是这样，它没有说哦，卡斯特罗先生，你可以做你想做的事，这是一扇敞开的门
如果你想和苏联在一起，那对我们来说没问题，不，它说得好，我们入侵，所以那是1961年和1962年
其影响以及真正鲁莽的赌博和鲁莽的行动
苏联向古巴发射导弹 整个冲突升级为
当时正值核战争和古巴导弹危机的边缘，然后是 1963 年
肯尼迪总统和苏联主席尼基塔·库舍夫都说你知道我们必须从悬崖边撤退
为了共同生活，我们不应该走到全球核战争的边缘
他们于 1963 年夏天签署了部分核试验条约，证明
即使在冷战最激烈的时候，如果心态正确，你也可以实现和平，这就是我们的心态
现在需要的是，新保守主义思维似乎从未真正消失过
知道只是帮助我们理解，因为在我看来，你知道乌克兰对于美国来说并不是不可或缺的，这只是他关于北约东扩的想法，但幕后还有其他力量在获利或推动
据我所知，你知道的扎林斯基获得了 1100 亿美元的美国援助
当然，人道主义财政军事支持也喜欢与黑人的重要合作伙伴关系
Rock Venture Capital 公司高盛将乌克兰资产私有化，以便
然后会加深国家的债务，所以帮助我们了解一点前进的道路，我们如何摆脱这个困境
好吧，当 20 世纪 90 年代关于智慧或缺乏智慧的辩论最初激烈时，
北约东扩的智慧与我们的承诺背道而驰，也是不明智的，进行了游说活动
以美国为首的军事工业联合体非常简陋，就是这样
美国政治作品带来了大笔资金，所以是罗恩和洛基·巴顿
其他大公司成为说客，然后你知道美国国会议员向金钱致敬
向竞选贡献致敬 他们向游说者致敬，所以这就是美国政治的运作方式
经济利益在这里也发挥着作用，所以我们有意识形态混乱、缺乏历史的混合体。
感觉傲慢和金钱都在搅动锅，这与它没有什么关系
美国人民，尽管美国人民没有被问及任何关于乌克兰资金的投票
几乎是秘密，因为它们并没有真正争论过，它们只是实施的措施
其他一些立法，这样你就不必争论我们已经花费了超过 100 亿美元的事实
到目前为止，关于乌克兰的问题，没有人真正被问到过。
美国人民还没有真正被问到，这就是美国政治现在的运作方式，这场战争应该做什么
应该以美国表示北约不会扩大和俄罗斯结束
说我们要把我们的军队带回家，这是这个的核心，可以在
2021 年 12 月发布，2022 年 3 月发布，现在仍然可用
没有解决许多其他问题 领土发生了什么 克里米亚发生了什么 这些是为了
谈判，但基本想法是两个超级大国退出，战争停止，我们去
政治解决方案而不是军事解决方案，这应该是我们的首要任务，所以最后正如你所想的那样
关于未来，呃，核战争的前景，我们现在所处的世界
留给下一代您希望年轻人知道什么，保留并记住年轻人应该领导什么
通往更安全、和平、环境可持续的合作人民之路
公平的世界，这是我们需要建设我们不想感受到的未来的关键
陷入暴力和环境破坏的无意识循环
我们面临的问题是可以解决的，而不是由需求驱动的
人们被精英的贪婪或权力追求所驱使，我们需要
让新一代人说这行不通，我们想要一个和平的世界
共同繁荣，解决环境危机
已经变得如此深刻并且被忽视，部分原因是我们在浪费时间
我们的资源都花在这些无用的战争上，不让我说这是第一本书
西方政治学的理论是更好的说法，因为柏拉图在一代人的时间里写下了《理想国》
较早，但这是第一本与他的作品配对的政治学书籍
尼科马基伦理学和两个加入的伦理学
因为对于亚里士多德来说，伦理学和政治学是
当然15 14也是一样，我认为是这样
马卡维利写了一本非常不同的政治学，他写了一本手册
对于王子来说，这是关于如何维持
西方的权力和政治学开始成为维护权力的科学。
或管理权力不是生产善的科学，事实上马卡维利正在教导
王子实际上正在向米底人提出工作申请，因为他已被米底人解雇了
他想要一份工作，他正在为米底人提供如何保住权力的建议
《佛罗伦萨》后来在《下一世纪》中成为西方最有影响力的文本之一
文化史的作者是托马斯·霍布斯
《利维坦》写于 1640 年，当时西方科学正在形成，
霍布斯想要一种关于人类的科学理论
但建模为相互碰撞的单个原子，因为对于霍布斯来说
不再是德行的培养，而是每个人的道德修养
贪得无厌所以霍布斯的人性模型
是它只是无限的欲望，无法被教导去节制
欲望是不能培养美德的
个人主义，它是贪得无厌的，所以滚刀说，除非有
他说，这是一种压倒性的力量，人们会互相残杀，所以我们需要一个利维坦
为了阻止人性不断犯下暴力
对人性非常悲观的看法，但请注意，要点不再是
是否有任何被认为不可能的培养美德的想法
需要机构来反思残酷的现实
这是哲学的翻转，不再是培养善行
关于控制不好的事情
有趣且重要的是这是
在 18 世纪初首先被一个非常呃
有影响力的公共知识分子伯纳德·曼达维尔
在伦敦写了一篇名为《蜜蜂寓言》的文章，在《蜜蜂寓言》中
最有攻击性的蜜蜂获胜，但它们使蜂巢变得强大
太棒了，如果你试图控制贪婪、恶习或攻击性
蜂巢中的蜜蜂实际上会死亡，所以这现在是一种哲学
帝国认为权力追求是好的，因为它会让社会变得更好
强大、富有并且能够支配他人
所以它采用了霍布斯并添加了另一个元素
蜂巢统治他人，显然这是一种吸引新兴英国人的哲学
六十年后，亚当·斯密出现了帝国。
第1776章 1776
人性是个人主义的品味
无限的欲望是巨大的动力，但市场力量会驯服
所有这一切都是因为市场力量将迫使一种竞争
从而造福社会
结果重点是盎格鲁撒克逊哲学摆脱了1800多个
多年的西方传统 西方传统
亚里士多德和基督教是共同利益的传统
随着英国的崛起，美德和对穷人的关怀
帝国哲学的出现变成了权力的好处
哲学，甚至是这样的想法：这会导致引用常见的观点
很好，但还有两个重要步骤可以说明穷人已成为
敌人，因为现在他们是社会的拖累，所以约翰·洛克是我们最重要的人之一
受人尊敬的哲学家希望穷人受到非常严厉的对待，这样他们
不会成为社会的负担然后
马鲁斯 托马斯·马鲁斯在亚当·斯密之后的一代人之后写道
1798 年，他提出了一些更黑暗的建议，那就是那些蜂巢
不同的社会实际上是在相互竞争生存
因为生产的人口数量超出了能够供养的人口数量，所以生活就是一场争夺战
生存和帮助穷人的努力不可避免地会失败，因为
成为更多的穷人，这是他的铁律
人口及其引领下一个
达尔文从科学的角度出色地继承了这个想法
理解自然选择的观点，但19世纪后期
哲学家们把这个想法看作是一场跨界斗争
各个国家，现在各个国家、人民或种族都在为之奋斗
生存，这被称为社会达尔文主义，这个想法不仅是
如果你没有仁慈地帮助自己的穷人，那么与其他社会相比，你就会削弱你的社会，事实上
你正在为生存而奋斗，这导致了最糟糕的情况
历史罪行，因为纳粹主义实际上是
它是建立在社会基础上的哲学
达尔文主义的伪科学和德国人民会的这种想法
生存下去，或者斯拉夫人民将会生存，所以这甚至是一场战争
现在消灭这种想法导致了最坏的结果
残酷，但我们仍然处于西方世界的心态中
竞争和斗争才是
当我学习经济学时，我是社会的绝对基础
教我如何完美竞争 我从来没有被教过，哪怕一分钟
完美的合作这个想法甚至不存在
据我所知，经济学甚至没有在一篇论文中对此进行过阐述，因为合作的理念是
规范不存在
发生了让贪婪激励的想法
行动也许确实产生了创新精神
在某种程度上，但事实就是如此
拥护和教导当然会导致最糟糕的结果
过度行为使世界变得富有，而那些富有的人变得一贫如洗
充满仁慈和同情心，也是一位糟糕的作家
美国的aan变得相当流行
兰德是一种在年轻人中流行的哲学剧
人们和许多政治家写了一篇著名的文章
自私的美德因此自私成为
美德实际上就是一篇文章的字面标题，令人难以置信，她是
这些小说仍然受到许多人的拥护，读起来令人难以忍受，但它们是一部分
我们的理念所以我说得太长了我知道因为五分钟前标志告诉我停下来
但这对我来说不太仁慈，但让我说
接下来我相信我们已经偏离了西方的正确道路
文明有西方文化的根源，我们可以真正利用它们来寻找
美德之路和政治之路
道德的，但盎格鲁撒克逊版本深深地失去了这一点
传统，这有很多令人着迷的原因，但主要是
大英帝国实力的崛起在很多方面都是
极其恶劣的帝国和美国学到了
它从大英帝国那里知道的一切，因为它的目标是成为
二战后大英帝国的延续，这就是需要终结一个世界
可以回归共同的道德原则
现在让我总结一下，我希望这能够
确实发生了，我认为你们在座需要帮助领导这件事，我们需要
帮助解释这些事情以及何时
习近平主席去年发起了全球文明倡议
认为这实际上是一个非常积极的重要开端
因为中国说过我们应该回到我们的文化根源来寻找出路
我非常赞同的转发以及 GCI 或全球文明倡议
是一次跨越文明智慧的邀请，我在雅典主持了一次会议
上个月与雅典学院联合举办亚里士多德孔子研讨会
探讨古代智慧应对现代挑战的方法，将中国和
西方哲学家，除了一位非常有名的佛陀之外，我们并没有正确地把佛陀放在餐桌上。
来自柬埔寨的杰出佛教思想家，但我们需要更多这样的人
这次会议结束时，我们同意举行第二次会议
这次的座谈会我希望是亚里士多德佛孔子座谈会
7月我在山东省舒呃
希望我们能一起参与，呃我们会回来那么多
哲学家们感兴趣的是我下个月将在 shuu 呃
尼山呃论坛里面呃也是一个
哲学论坛，但山东省政府要求主办
亚里士多德佛孔子座谈会和我的后续会议
相信东方的这种理念
西方深层哲学传统寻找共同的深层人性
跨越它们是极其重要和强大的，并且真的可以
有助于达成目前尚不存在的理解，我认为
如果我认为这种理解的缺陷绝大多数是在西方方面
可能会这么说，因为我们沉浸在竞争甚至战争的哲学中
这种心态被认为是理所当然的，但它实际上是最近出现的现象
这是一种帝国现象，需要被搁置，所以我相信这
实际上可以做到，我可以再多两个吗
分钟，因为我想谈谈 2050 年净零排放，首先要表达我是多么钦佩
肖博士提出的建议和我是这本书的英文版或中文版
中文 英文 好吧，如果可以的话，我们得给我一份英文翻译
但我也非常渴望阅读您即将发表的论文，让我添加一些内容
我认为是核心的东西，但我认为它们已经完全在你的呃
气候俱乐部的想法是不可能的
一次一个国家实现净零排放
最重要的是，对于一个岛屿来说，我们需要互联的能源
系统按地区划分，因为如果您正在利用可再生能源，
间歇性，所以这里是晴天或这里有风，这需要
互联互通和东亚应在共同网格中互联
中国大陆有一个节目叫导游
中国国家合作组织
正在进行分析工作的网格工程师
互连非洲、南美洲、北美的区域电网
美国对于欧洲和亚洲来说是
非常重要的工作 台湾应该与
大陆在一个电网中，大陆应该和蒙古连接，应该连接
与阿桑国家
并与子
系统它将[音乐]成为该地区的经济动力源
世界而不是战场，因为这个地区有
如果它一起工作，它就会失去一切，如果它一起工作，它可能会失去一切
它将该地区视为战场 我想这里的每个人
地区可以理解这一点，唯一不理解的是我
实际上是国家，但需要告诉美国
我们解决我们的问题，我们知道如何
讨论不要干涉，因为你会弄得一团糟
这实际上是关于日本的事实
这是零碳能源和所有的合作
会
区域合作、区域结构和
以及可能显示的路线图
物理互连 哪些技术
我去过哪里
与计划相反的是 80% 是化石燃料 那是什么计划
没什么，请不要鼓励
他们如此
显示 ptic 或工作 我是索尼，我刚刚在
几天前在北京，我们将回来参加他们将于 9 月 26 日举办的会议，呃
关于能源互联的全球会议 我认为这确实是呃呃 AB 绝对是核心
所以我同意你所说的一切，我认为这绝对是正确的方式
向前，在那个多中心世界里有一个概念
我发现这非常有用，这是一个由
欧盟实际上是一个始于罗马天主教的概念
教会，这就是我们需要的辅助性概念
各级治理，因此我们需要全球治理
区域治理 国家治理 地方治理 你把每个问题都放在
尽可能最低的级别，最接近可以解决问题但无法解决的人
低于可以解决的水平，因此电网无法必须在国家层面解决
在区域层面解决脱碳目标
必须在全球层面上解决，等等，辅助性的想法是
我们有多个层面 我们有全球治理 我们有全球治理
政府可以做某些事情，但不能做其他事情
政府 我们有国家政府 我们有

xxxx

Jeffrey Sachs, US political outcome is bumb now

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgsLijX32tI&ab_channel=FinanceCritics
April 3, 2024

well I would say the quality of the American democracy has declined
tremendously during my lifetime um maybe that's an illusion but I feel that and I
can see even in the data that people had more confidence in government 60 years
ago than they have today and I look at that and I've of course spent my whole
life trying to understand that declining confidence in our government and I find
two factors uh that are at the core of this one is that after World War II the
United States created a Security State uh with the CIA and other
institutions that were supposedly ensuring National Security but in fact
they really diminished democracy; because the first principle of the CIA is that
it's secret and its actions are secret and um it does lots of things around the
world that are not good; but they're secret so this really undermined
American democracy and um we don't have a de we don't have much
public effect on foreign policy for example in the United States because
when it comes to foreign policy really the president and a few uh other people
make decisions on behalf of everybody without public debate or without control
by any really Democratic institutions other than a vote once
every few years; but that's not enough because we go to war all the time against the interests of the American
people um so that's one part of the problem the other part of the problem that I mentioned earlier is the big
money in politics some countries restrict private campaign financing in
fact most in Europe don't have a lot of Corruption of the political system but
the United States I regard as kind of legal corruption legal in the sense that
our Supreme Court said that companies can spend whatever they want on politics
no restriction and or few restrictions um and the result is our election cycle say the
2024 election will spend maybe1 15
billion dollars of campaign financing now you don't get honest government with so much money Changing Hands you get
government that is purchased by the highest bidder and this is H why the
confidence in democracy has declined so much you mentioned of course the power of big
money I I I wouldn't be so optimistic about the situation in Europe I just believe because the economies are weaker
then uh there's not so much money as in the US but the tendency is practically uh practically the same uh you you
mentioned Joe Biden and of course then president Trump uh probably will meet in
in elections next year probably um do you see the crisis in in leadership
because when we uh look into past we see many strong leaders who were both from
Europe from the United States who were able to offer some vision and leader Society some of them even towards a
peaceful Society we mention bil brand Olaf Palmer we can also mention well we can also mention rald dran uh as a
special type of American Heritage as well uh I would say there is a certain
decline in these leadership uh qualities do you view it as well because in in
Europe it's I think very visible yes I think the quality of the political
leadership in the US and Europe is very weak right now in general speaking of
the United States uh we have uh two leading candidates one of whom is 81 and
can't find his way off the stage anymore he happens to be our president and the
other one is a convicted uh is is is multiply convicted uh
uh uh psychologically unstable person uh who now faces dozens of criminal uh
counts right now in Trials coming up so maybe we'll have a a an
octogenarian who is who should never be running and a convicted felon uh running
for the presidency this is a terrible terrible thing obviously uh
how can we get there there are some other candidates I'm hoping that Robert
Kennedy Junior uh proves himself as a highly capable candidate and I like him
we were schoolmates we're friends uh and uh he comes from a great political
tradition in fact uh his uncle uh John F Kennedy was in my view the last great
American president uh because after that well we had some
very nice and smart people a few not very many Jimmy Carter was one uh but um
we've had a lot of failed presidents and failed presidencies so the quality of
leadership is uh is quite low and in Europe it's also really surprising to me
how when the United States makes such bad bad judgments European leaders tend to
follow along uh the US lead and of course I'm very unhappy about the
Ukraine war I mean everyone's unhappy about it but I have a view that's somewhat different from the mainstream
view which is in my interpretation the war in Ukraine was caused by the US
wanting to expand NATO uh and uh of course uh
many in Europe say no no no it's all Putin uh he he did this but I I know
enough history and I was present at enough events to know how much the US
provoked this war through absolutely stupid policies because if you're smart
you don't push a military Alliance right up against Russia's border uh that's
just not a wise thing to do Russia's extremely sensitive to uh the military
of the West encroaching on it because of how many times Russia's been invaded by
the west and especially when the United States politicians have so much
hostility to Russia which they do they openly express the idea that Russia
should be dismantled and many other things of course Russia's going to see Nat expansion as a direct threat to
National Security and it's not going to let it happen so this is just an example
of terrible policy predictable disaster
but the US went along with it now my point was the Europeans knew better I
know because many Europeans told me many times oh NATO expansion to Ukraine's
very dangerous but then they don't say it in public uh and uh they don't say it
in public because the United States uh would get mad at them and uh you know
they're afraid of the US they shouldn't be afraid of the US Europe should have its own independent foreign policy and
it should understand its own interests uh and the interests are not just
following along the United States so this is a just a a very important
example of the weakness of the political leadership right now in in Europe as well as in the United States yeah we we
see that here very well so they're actually not able even to formulate the national interests and I don't know if
if it's fear or simply they are not capable to understand what's going on maybe it's combination of both however
the con the consequences are really disastrous for the EU both economically and politically of course you mentioned
one one European political leader said to me uh a couple of years ago oh they
don't take us seriously in Washington and um he said it even more
colorfully which I won't repeat exactly but uh this was a leader of a major
country and my thought was yeah but you should not allow yourself to be treated
that way that's your fault that's not America's fault yes America's arrogant
but stand up for Europe uh and uh this should be the approach but it's not the
approach because I think we've covered a lot of ground for aan and we've heard a
lot of things that are very promising and that's good because we need some uh
optimism and some direction for
uh how to uh overcome some of some of the big challenges
right now if we were to step back from our
crisis and look at uh some of the very
um fundamental Trends in the world we'd have a great deal of reason for for
optimism in fact uh the world economy and world society as a whole has become
much better off than it was a 100 years ago without question life expectancy has
risen remarkably income in the world on
average is now $20,000 per person if measured at
International prices and about $122,000 per person if measured at market prices
and this is a huge rise of incomes and
wellbe and uh quality of diets
protection uh of Health Care coverage and many many other uh really
fundamental parts of our material life and what Dr Xiao described for China
which is absolutely incredible for 1.4 billion people over a period of 40 years
um has been achieved not quite at that pace but very broadly in many parts of
the world and the underlying reason for those improvements is that science
technology knoow has advanced and continues to advance even at an
accelerating rate so our ability to
address practical challenge is is really unprecedented right now our wealth is
unprecedented and our knowhow is unprecedented this is really the
fundamental reason for being uh very optimistic about what we can do and what
we should do in the coming years what we've learned though is that
there are at least three three
fundamental problems with the way the world functions and that's what brings
us to this workshop and what brings us to the sustainable development goals the
first is that with all that progress there are billions of people
that have been effectively left behind this progress that are really
struggling for a variety of reason reasons people live in more remote
areas or in very unfavorable geographies or are part of minority
groups that have been maltreated within Societies or half the population women
and girls that traditionally were not part of the market economy were part of
the household economy and have definitely seen uh progress but facing a
lot of social obstacles still today which is why one of the sustainable
development goals is directed specifically at the issues of gender
sg5 so one of the three huge challenges is that we have a rich world and a lot
of very poor and suffering people people within that world and that's just
uh I think for most of our us humanly
unacceptable and indeed when the UN was established in
1948 all of the member states agreed that there should be basic standards of
life for every person on the planet because they're people on the planet
because they're human beings and the world is productive enough to ensure the
Dignity of everybody and that's why the universal Declaration of Human Rights
was adopted and I regard us still trying to honor that declaration which seems to
me to be the basic point so problem number one is the very
uneven development the the fact that there is still
today uh a significant part of the world that lives in really abject
deprivation and that's a a first Challenge and I think
it's ethically probably the number one challenge because extreme deprivation in
a world of Plenty is absolutely uh
destructive of all of our Humanity if we don't solve that problem so that's why
sdg1 is and extreme poverty straightforward and sdg2 the
second highest priority is end Hunger For Heaven's Sake of course there are big challenges
of how to do it but I will say in a world of wealth and knowledge this is
definitely within reach it's crazy to my mind that if the average income is
$112,000 per capita there are people living at a few $100 per capita and the
world just goes on as they suffer and die young and face terrible hardships
the second Big Challenge the huge challenge the puzzle that is even harder than the
first one conceptually is that we discovered about 50 years ago
that the nature of our Economic Development all that wealth that I just talked about is environmentally
destructive because the much vaunted economic
processes don't take care of their physical
byproducts and some of them were not understood
till 50 or 100 years ago like Greenhouse
gases and their effects on climate that was that required a scientific
breakthrough of a quite deep order to understand that it came by the end of
the 19th century and then it took at least uh 75 years to create
measurement systems to verify the science and we've more or less known from around 1980 that humanity is really
changing the climate in ways that could be dangerous and we're still struggling
with that fact because what brought us that wealth in the first place starting
in the 1800s was fossil fuels and then we discovered about halfway through oh
those are dangerous that's not good so this is the second big problem is that
we have a economic system and a set of laws rules regulations a Global Commons
the Open Seas and many other factors of
our economic system that mean that uh the scale of production is now
self-destructive and as I say we've understood this intellectually at least for 70 at least for about 50 years uh it
was 50 years ago that the first conference on this fact took hold it was
51 years ago that the first good book about this limits to growth was written
and made clear that there was a real problem and we've not finished solving
that problem but let me stipulate the following just like I did for the first
one there's nothing fundamental about these environmental
challenges that is beyond our solution even with our current knowledge base
in other words we already in 2023 have the range of Technical
Solutions to 90% of the greenhouse
gases not 100% we definitely don't
face a choice between food and nature we cha face a choice between uh
un between destructive and non-destructive forms of food production that's a very different
choice I haven't found in 40 Years of my work on this a
fundamental barrier to economic well-being and environmental
sustainability so I'm not in the degrowth school of thought which says
that what we really need is to reverse Economic Development not all economic
development is good for human well-being that's a different matter but I'm not of the school of thought that says we've
created a kind of society that is completely
inconsistent with our environmental
Necessities or our environmental well-being or health what we have is a
very flawed economic system legal system regulatory
system incentive structure so that we adopt or continue with technologies that
are very ill advised and do lots of stupid things because it's possible to make money off of those stupid things
rather than do the things that we should be doing and I've not seen in all of my
experience any calculations that show me that this that doing the right things is beyond our
reach beyond our budget beyond our uh economic
means for example all of the estimates about the energy transformation to a
zero carbon Energy System suggests that it's one or 2% of world output that is
needed to make that change that's really strange it's not
that it's 50% of world output that's needed it's not that this is
cataclysmically expensive and we're just doomed as if an asteroid were
coming to hit the planet and we have nothing to do no we have clear very very clear
things to do sometimes we have too many possib
things to do so we don't know which one to take so we were paralyzed should we do wind or solar or
nuclear or this I don't know we won't do anything right now we're making money
with what we're doing so we're paralyzed or we know what to do but there are
strong vested interests saying don't do it because I'm making too much money in the short term
doing the destructive things or it just is complicated and hasn't been thought
out properly because this is something absolutely new it was rather
straightforward to build a coal plant but it's not so straightforward perhaps
to build offshore wind or solar fields or something else because of storage or
other issues so they're just complexities but that's the second big
category of challenge that we face which is this economic
environmental Collision Course which again needs analysis and then needs to
ask how deep is the problem and for me and how solvable is the problem so the
climate crisis is very deep but it's also rather
solvable and there are some puzzles definitely what should big ocean
tankers run on should it be hydrogen fuel cells should it be ammonia should
it be hydrogen combustion I'm not an engineer I've heard the arguments from
the engineers I want them to fight it out I want them to try different
approaches but clearly we should be trying these technology lines the third
Big Challenge which is a challenge of time immemorial
is that we seem to have a very hard time to stop killing each
other so War becomes all ever more dangerous
because the weapons become ever more destructive and now we're
technologically so smart that we figured out how to destroy the whole
Humanity damn it if we weren't so smart we wouldn't have this
trouble but a few Geniuses figured out you could make nuclear fishing work to
make a bomb by the way there were probably 50 people in the world that
understood that and they figured it out and then they gave it to a world of
idiots so we have a lot of dumb people who are in charge of nuclear weapons and
they were made by a few Geniuses that's our problem so this is our third issue which
is how to stay peaceful and Cooperative to my mind these are the three big
issues that we face which is how to be fair and decent
to people who are suffering uffing how to make sure that we're not
self-destructive because our economic system is actually a complicated set of
incentives that doesn't get things right and there's no magic in how we have
organized our economic life to handle issues like greenhouse gases which
weren't in Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations and are not part of
the uh things that a free market can solve and so forth and the third is this
interminable problem that if you read human history we've been fighting with each other most of the time but there
are also glimmers of hope that there are long periods of peace and we also have
institutions for peace just like we have institutions for war one of the things that makes me
quite optimistic about China's rise is that China has been much more peaceful in its
history than just about any other region of the world and the amount of
Interstate war of China over the last 2,000 years is actually quite low it's
basically been Wars of uh pastoralists coming from the north uh and uh
sedentary Farmers trying to fight them off uh and that's been most of China's
Wars for 2,000 years if you look at Europe's Wars it was just kill each other across the Divide
for a thousand years nonstop um so China at least has a peaceful
tradition and I think it fits actually with this idea of harmonious Society
with the idea of global civilizations and so forth I'm quite an optimist I
have to say about that because I think it uh actually there's a a deep
rootedness so that's all we have to do end poverty
protect the environment stop killing with each other all right
so thank you no okay so so what do we
do to my mind the basic thing is we should think hard about each of those
things and then come up with plans that's the most basic
idea that sounds so dumb why am I saying that
after 40 years don't I have anything more intelligent to say and the thing is
that the way that our social systems work is not to think and then solve
these things and that's very interesting our economic system is
designed around a different principle which is let people do what
they want get rich go find your job go uh buy what you
want but not solve problems so in economic land it's not oriented towards
solving problems it's oriented towards doing your thing businesses are supposed
to go make profits and we're supposed to be good consumers and we're supposed to be smart in the job that we pursue but
at least in market economics which is became the
dominant uh ideology of the Anglo-Saxon world and
then the world it isn't to solve problems it's go do your thing so don't
expect the answers to these problems to come from the economic sphere
or from the business Community it's not their job their job is to run a business it's
to make money so that's problem number one that
we don't think in the economic sphere about end goals we're supposed to just
do our thing and then politicians in most politics it's not
about about solving problems it's about maintaining
power and that's even the goal and you have experts on maintaining power all
the politicians have little machellies around them handing them this is what you need to do to stay in
power and that's your goal and so politics at least in my
country has very little to do with any goals I don't know what any American
goals are we have no goals we have some Heroes our founding
fathers we love the Constitution we like the July 4th independence day but we have no
goals and even when I hear Dr Xiao talk about China's
goals you could not have that in the United States stating those
goals because that's that's that's
socialism uh you're not allowed to have goals so politics is not oriented
towards solving problems really it's management management of power
competition for power holding on to power benefiting from power and so we
don't see from our governments most of the time these big goals and how to
solve them I really think China's been different in this period the last 40
years from most other governments and I think the success is a result of that
actually that it's really and why well I think this very interesting question but
um a few countries at a few times have very clear goals maybe because of
survival maybe because of their past history maybe because they have a
successful uh neighbor uh so they want to imitate the success maybe like in
Singapore because a genius came leuan Yu and he had a very very clear idea and
really Singapore it is a case of a very clear brilliant thinker
who just guided things for quite a while like Plato's philosopher king but most
of the time this is not how politics is
so we don't see a lot of this problem solving coming from
governments and the third thing is in my country which became the most
powerful country in the world for uh the last 75 years militarily
they really think that fighting Wars is a big part of what governance is about they're
crazy and dangerous and could get us all
killed so that third category of just peaceful cooperation does not come
easily every day we read something hateful about China in the American
newspaper now every single day I just read
today China has the global civilizations initiative wonderful you talked about it
today I just read this is terrible this is you know out to China's out to take
over the world through this now honestly this is a mindset that
is very very deep probably in rained
evolutionarily in us also because there probably was a time when whoever could
control the next water hole survived and whoever didn't didn't survive and it was
us or them and that's not how the world is right now it's not us or them we
don't need to take over any other place to have well-being period there's no
crisis of living room there is only the crisis of understanding don't kill the
other side okay so what do we do again just to conclude we need to
think clearly excuse me that's a technical
term about American politics so we need really to put
serious ideas forward in detail and
that's the purpose of what we're after and two specific Pathways that we're
really focusing on right now is one is the energy transition because there's only a
quarter century and an energy systems really complicated you have to have a power
grid we have to convert all the vehicles to electric or to hydrogen or to some
other non-emitting Source the building sector has to be far
more efficient industry emits a lot of greenhouse gases deforestation in other words all
of the getting to Net Zero is quite a complicated challenge with lots of
moving parts and it's a lot of money not more than not more than an energy system
cost but an energy system is trillions of dollars a year and so it's worth getting
right so that's the first of the pathways and the second is the land
use and ocean use because we're
really so close to destroying everything
irreversibly when the species is lost it's never coming
back and when the ecosystems are degraded many of them never return and
if we pass climate thresholds we're just going to spend the next Century in
disaster of calamitous sea level rises storms heat waves and so on so we're
very close to that so those are the two main Pathways that we are really
focusing on the biological and its Associated its
association with food production and with other agricultural production and
for this region that's Central because this is a biodiversity uh Garden of Eden and also
a biodiversity threatened region intensively all this beauty and
it's being torn down and it can happen so fast
because economies are very uh very very large right now
and demands China could DeForest this country just by its demands for tropical
Hardwoods without a problem unless you take care so those are the two areas that we
really want to focus on and the final point that I want to say is again about
this third category of cooperation it happens that when you look technically at an energy program or
at a ecosystem program no country can do
this by itself nothing can be done other than at the local level but plans need
to be transnational without question so
there's a lot of local action but they have to be part of a broader
framework and that's why this is an AI Workshop because aan countries are not
only together on the map and not only physical neighbors but have work to do
together because Assan countries cannot achieve their goals without working
together and so we need to do this at a transnational planning level that's hard
because there are no elected transnational officials
anywhere all transnational organizations are weak cuz none of them has an
army none of them has political leaders we're organized at
the national level in the world that's where the physical Force
lies and yet and that's where the politics generally lies and yet we have
Global and Regional problems that need addressing urgently the makong is not
going to be saved one country at a time it's going to be saved by China Lao PDR
Cambodia Vietnam working together without question there's no way to do
that one country at a time it's got to be done in the Watershed the energy
system for Malaysia absolutely needs to be integrated with the rest of the
region and those Regional institutions are weak politically and
organizationally and they need to be strengthened considerably and then
uh the question of what region is the right region for this we're dealing with
aan because it's a crucial establish Regional entity but I said yesterday and
I'll say it again I think for the energy sector ARP is even more appropriate
that's adding in Assan plus China Japan Korea Australia and New Zealand the
United States would have a fit by the way I I'll be done in one
minute the us would have a fit you're cooperating with China
well my strong advice to you is cooperate with China closely and my
strong advice to Australia is don't build a submarine base cooperate with
China and let's not waste money on nuclear submarines right now and raise
the tension more so my own advice is that broader
group and I hope India joins that group and then we've got a lot of the world together in a way that could actually
solve the problems so sorry for the long rambling except I believe that all of
these problems are solvable I believe that universities have a unique and
extremely important role to play in this because this is what we should be
doing training teaching educating researching
policy analysis and really trying to make
politics work the way that it should which is for the common good thank
you a political outcome right now not the one we wanted but we were so dumb
not to take a better deal a year ago two years ago 5 years ago 10 years ago that
now we're in a situation where we're not going to get exactly what we quote want
but to continue the fighting would absolutely destroy even
more what worries me most is actually that really the lives of ukrainians are
just taken as a as a casualty as something not even worth speaking about
they don't even talk about it the leadership is absolutely gross you know
I look I I'm sure that do sininsky is in a very hard place but all he talks about
right now is throwing more lives to the graves frankly no strategy no
self-awareness no situational awareness okay it's very sad because the
United States talked him out of a peace agreement in March 2022 that was
zelinsky's chance and he lost it he was inexperienced you know when you the
United States comes and tells you we have your back you you know you tend to believe it if you're inexperienced I
tried to tell them by the way I you know I I really tried to tell the ukrainians look I'm I'm an old guy I've been
through lots of us Wars Vietnam War Nicaragua uh the gulf Wars Syria they
never win are you kidding do you really want to end up like Afghanistan and they didn't believe me they just thought oh
you're a Putin apologist so they didn't want to hear any of this but I was telling them the hard facts about
American wars and they didn't want to hear it uh besides Russia I'm not sure that
Ukraine actually is such a big topic uh in in American uh policy I'm not sure
about that defitely you know it's a big focus of
the political class still the military industrial complex and the White
House maybe for just political reasons that Biden doesn't want to admit what a
lousy poker player he is but the the point is uh for the American people
they've had enough there's no ground swell of support people don't want that
they want to stop this thing and so in that sense you're absolutely right
typically the public doesn't have much say in this we have almost no public debate but Biden's popularity is really
collapsing and if the uh unhappiness with Biden's foreign policy is very very
clear so maybe even public opinion is going to start playing a role because
we're now in an election year um I would like to ask you to clear
the position on China because when I look both at Republicans or at the Democrats I would say that their views
on China are very similar so they actually have very hostile views towards
China uh now there was a summit uh ape where uh both presidents Biden and
chining met um do you see any any decline in tension any hopes that
actually the relations they are probably not going to be friendly but let's say at least stabilize and and would be less
less threatening for the I'll tell you an interesting thing when President XI came to this Apex Summit in
San Francisco he met 200 US Business Leaders and they gave him a standing
ovation I don't think they would give an American president a standing ovation but they gave president XI a standing
ovation why China is their biggest Market they both produce in China they
sell in China they make a lot of money in China and they want normal relations
what what is happening is two things one we have a kind of security class in
America who uh are all about American
dominance American hegemony America being number one it's a very strange
group of people uh but this is our foreign policy establishment then we
have politicians who basically think that and it's very particular
Trump in 2016 won the election by winning swing states in the middle of
America in the American Midwest which is our industrial Zone and he won it by
saying China took your jobs away and when he made narrow victories in those
States the Democrats said oh we have to attack China in order to compete
politically with Trump so there are two reasons for the
anti-china sentiment in the United States one and in the political class
one is this idea of America being the only dominant country well you know you
know unless you're playing a board game like the game of Risk you don't get to be the dominant country in the world
when there are other big countries around so this is era an again very
misguided then there is this protectionist politics which uh tries to appeal to a
few swing states in the US elections the upshot of this is that the political
class both Democrats and Republicans are pretty United against China pretty
ignorant from my experience they don't know China they don't know Chinese history they don't have any perspective
they play a dangerous game like when uh our Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi
flew to Taiwan so stupid sorry
just why do you want to provoke another super thank you for saying that because
we have the same Representatives who are also provoking China in this in this
okay don't provoke China be respectful just have normal relations don't provoke
a superpower why what is in it to poke a
superpower it's stupid people should think you know if there's
some even if you think there's a bully which China's not but if you think there's a bully in the schoolyard and
you're a you know a little kid and you think they're the bully is it really smart to go poking them and say you're
you're a bully I hate you no you're going to get hurt in the end so you need
some common sense and China's not even bullying China is just big successful
Dynamic actually a good trade partner for Europe so we should treat it normally respectfully and uh the US
anxieties should not be Europe's anxieties this is another area where
European politicians are just repeating the words of American politicians and
you know I know behind the scenes it's although it's obvious you know why does
vanderlan repeat words almost like Biden
because she feels that her job is to be with the United States maybe she hopes
the United States appoints her as the Secretary General of NATO or something I don't know what it is no but that's what
what she hopes maybe so this is where Europe makes a big mistake just like it
did make a big mistake in Ukraine it would make a big mistake of trying to make an enemy out of China that's a
completely ridiculous losing proposition uh my last question because
our time is coming up I have to reflect one very current event you already mentioned and that's uh the elections in
Argentina yes because let's say that uh the elected president is um unusual
personality um how how do you view this situation um is there a danger for for
bricks or or maybe for other Latin American countries with his very strange
suggestions as for foreign policy as for economics yeah of course time will tell
one thing is he won the presidency but has no uh control over the Congress uh
his small parties and at least for the moment doesn't have any kind of governing Coalition in the Congress so
maybe his uh ability to do things will require a much broader Coalition of
forces and that could be a a constraint but let me just say first Argentina is a
country that has been unstable for its whole history going back to the
1820s ever since Independence Argentina has messed up more currencies had more
inflation and more instability than any other place on the entire planet this
guy won not because of what he says but because of disgust with the outgoing
government which was delivering inflation of triple digits uh more than
a 100% you can't really win an election when inflation is triple digit and I
know Argentina quite well uh and actually worked with the Finance
Minister just before this one and he ended up he was doing a good job and he
ended up being not forced out he resigned unfortunately uh but he
resigned because his own I would say corrupt politicians in
his own party were uh rejecting the normal policies that he was trying to
promote so Argentina is now in yet another cycle of instability all my
professional career as an economist I've been watching Argentina in amazement because
it's it's not an impoverished country by any means and it's you know got huge
natural wealth and uh and very smart people um well educated class of people
but it has made such a political mess repeatedly and this could be yet another
one I don't want to say on the first day after the election of uh this guy that
he'll really govern the way he campaign because sometimes they become a lot more
responsible but it could be that he's that he is what he says he is in which
case uh Argentina is going to face some real troubles I don't it it's
regrettable because I'm I'm a a fan of the bricks I would like to see them work
Argentina is a new member of the bricks group uh whether this guy stays in or
out of the bricks or gets kicked out of the bricks everything remains to be seen uh but I uh
I only hope that this guy was making this as a Persona not as a
real politics because uh his real politics uh if delivered this way would
be very very detrimental to Argentina office in
2021 rather than trying to deescalate he called for NATO enlargement and
reinforced the US push to expand Eastward Putin strongly pushed back
Biden pushed back the US signed several statements in 2021 confirming that NATO
would enlarge I think this was all absolutely irresponsible Russia masked
troops on its border and put on the table a draft us Russia security
agreement on December 17th 2021 based on no NATO enlargement the Biden
Administration formally replied that it was not willing to negotiate over that
issue in a response in January then Russia invaded on February 24th
2022 making clear that it was the failure to reach an understanding on the
NATO question that was Central to Russia's action 4 Weeks Later
zalinski declared that Ukraine was accepting of neutrality in other words
the initial Russian invasion brought Ukraine to the negotiating table and
during the second half of March with the Turkish government being the mediators
Russia and Ukraine hammered out a peace agreement incredibly the United States
blocked it because the United States told the Ukrainian government you fight on because American policy makers
had two ideas one was that Ukraine should not be neutral it should be a
NATO country and second that the war would be won by some combination of
Western armaments and financial sanctions and so the us ratcheted up the
war Putin said no we don't stand down we fight and mobilized hundreds of
thousands of Russians in the summer of 2022 and since then we've been on a path
of military escalation I resent the fact as a citizen threatened by this that
Biden has not negotiated over NATO and that Biden and Putin have not talked
once as far as we know since February 24th 2022 you know when two sides are
fighting they need to talk and negotiate but that's rejected the hardliners in
the United States Newland Lincoln Sullivan Biden say why negotiate we just
escalate we'll defeat Russia this is in my view utterly Reckless and irresponsible first it leads to the
destruction of Ukraine and second it risks the escalation to nuclear war so
I'm very unhappy about this and I very much resent that the mainstream media
like the New York Times repeats the falsehood all the time that this was an
unprovoked action on Fe 24th 2022 seemingly wanting us to be without any
context or history to understand where this conflict came from and how it can
end and a newspaper like the New York Times has a responsibility to tell the
truth and they're not doing it indeed as Citizens we have the right you know a
country is not looking after in the US the prosperity of its own citizens going out conducting these irresponsible Wars
when we don't have time with other things with the environment I ironically what seems to be behind it all is this
insistence on a unipolar world insistence on dominance and while the US
wants to hold on to its status as a reserve currency it seems under those economic sanctions that us has also
suffered it might even be hastening strengthening the currencies of other countries well the basic point is the US
has 4.1% of the world population so how could it presume to be the world leader
you know the US is a powerful country it's a rich country but it doesn't run
the world and it should not aspire to run the world that's a kind of Madness
and the US ideology for a long time has been that the US should run the world
it's to my mind unbelievable but then again I've spent most of my career outside the US seeing the other
95.9% of the world and I know that the other 95% of the world doesn't want the
United states to run the world it's not against the United States just says let us have our own part of the world we
don't want you running the world we don't want you deciding what our government is who we are how we rule
ourselves you know you're just one place and this the United States leaders don't
understand they're very arrogant they're very ignorant because of the two big oceans they're very unaware of the
history of other parts of the world and we end up with this arrogant and naive
and dangerous foreign policy because there's no doubt the United States is Rich and powerful and it makes lots of
weapon systems and I'm 68 years old and the United States has been at War almost
every year of my life from Vietnam and la and Cambodia and Nicaragua and
Afghanistan and Iraq and Syria and Libya and now Ukraine come on give a break and
the US is also experiencing the reality that other places in the world are
catching up on technology indeed leading on Technologies as well and China's a
very successful very industrious very hardworking society which in the last 40
years has gone from poverty to a very significant World important economy and
the US has a very hard time accepting that the US at attitude if you listen to
congressmen who don't seem to know anything is oh if China's successful it must be because they're cheating what
about because they're saving more than 40% of GDP that the Chinese people have
been engaging in a remarkable upgrading of Education hundreds of thousands of
phds minted each year massive scientific research programs come on this is the
truth and so this arrogance is not allowing the truth to come through but you mentioned one specific point which
is the role of the US dollar part of the US strength after World War II is well
the US was basically the only economy standing and it was a technologically advanced Rich large economy the world's
largest and the dollar was really the only internationally usable currency for
quite a long time so the dollar system became the center of how you do International Trade when you trade in
Goods they're denominated dollars when you buy the Imports you pay in dollars
meaning you use accounts in US Dollars typically in the US banking system when
the transaction is closed it's closed through the so-called Swift interbank system and so the US has had a what
France long ago called an exorbitant privilege that it could print a lot of money because the rest of the world was
holding dollars using dollars the dollar was the basis of the world economy
that's changing now and it's changing for three basic reasons one is the share
of the US in the world economy is diminishing so this means that the
predominance of the US is bound to diminish the second is technologically
settlements are going to occur in all sorts of ways other than through US Banks and so-called digital currencies
especially Central Bank digital currencies will mean other other ways to make settlements we'll settle in renman
B when we buy in China or settle in Rubles or settle in rupes when trade is
with India and so forth so there will be multiple currencies and then the third part which is really a matter of a bad
set of decision making the US has militarized the dollar meaning that
usually you think about money well you have it you can use it you can spend it but the United States has come to say if
we don't like you you don't necessarily have access your money anymore if it's in our banks so the US froze the dollar
Holdings of Russia the US has frozen the dollar Holdings of Venezuela the US
froze the dollar Holdings of Afghanistan my advice to any government that's not getting along with the US government is
be careful about your money because the US might come in and freeze your money and so countries are looking to hold
their reserves in other ways now perfectly understandable and I think that this is a another part of the move
to a multi-currency International System from a dollar-based International System
and you mentioned the possibility of a reserve currency being the REM andb and so there's other things that are not
often reported about China One and I know that you've written about this as well is that they're stepping in where
America is policy of destabilizing and it's a destructive China in some cases in the Middle East is stepping in as a
peacemaker and it's less expensive if we can achieve peace well probably the most
remarkable diplomatic achievement of recent years I would say is China
brokering a peace agreement between Saudi Arabia and Iran in the American
idea those two countries were implacable foes they could never agree and for the
United States Iran was the enemy and Saudi Arabia was the Ally but the whole
idea of US foreign policy is you bring bring countries under your Authority as
an ally of the United States like Saudi Arabia and you fight your enemies on the
other side but China has a different idea which is that Saudi Arabia and Iran had no fundamental reasons for this
dissension but they have plenty of reasons for cooperation for one thing they're both being hard hit by climate
change they need to cooperate because the Water Crisis is quite severe they're both hydrocarbon economies they need an
energy transformation which is very profound and so the Chinese facilitated
a Reconciliation between the two I'm very happy about that reconciliation by
the way the fighting between the bitterness between Iran and Saudi Arabia
divided Western Asia it contributed to a absolutely devastating war in Yemen in
which the United States gave its military support that killed a lot of people and it d stabilized a region that
needs a lot of economic transformation and technological upgrading and change
and so this agreement is really a big help for the whole region not only for the two countries involved and China
gets a lot of credit in my view for having the wisdom to see that that was a
conflict that could be solved not just exacerbated but the US approach was
always to push at it even when the US made an agreement with Iran
the the nuclear agreement called the jcpoa the US government walked away from
it and then it maintained sanctions on Iran because the US is not really serious at making peace most of the time
it's got it US versus them mentality and I find that very destructive and not in
the US interest yes and I hope that China maintains this sensible approach
because it's dangerous what's happening now in Taiwan and just help understand the situation like in that through line
between you these proxy wars and what could happen in China well the situation in Taiwan is like the situation in
Ukraine very explosive very dangerous and requires cool heads to avoid a
conflict the fact of the matter is that actually all three governments let me
say the United States Taiwan and China have a policy that there's one China and
and whether it is the government in Taiwan or the government in Beijing they both say there's one China they disagree
on what happened in 1949 and how China should be governed but they don't say there are two countries and the United
States when it established diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China very clearly said that there is
one China and has one China policy and that is how to keep peace and to make
sure that this tension between Beijing and taipe does do not boil over to open
conflict but the United States started to play games with this it started to form a military alliance with Taiwan in
effect which is really coming into a military Alliance in the middle of one
country and this is an extremely dangerous and imprudent thing to do and
Biden starts talking about how we're going to defend Taiwan and the American politicians talk about how a war is
coming it's all utterly Reckless irresponsible and what we should have is
trying to reduce tensions diffuse tensions through negotiation through talk through peace
building ideas rather than stoking the idea that some conflict is inevitable a
conflict would be devastating of course first and foremost for Taiwan but
actually for the whole world and so this needs to be avoided and we need cool heads and we shouldn't have American
politicians saber rattling we should not have speaker Nazi Pelosi fly to Taiwan
after the Chinese government has repeatedly said don't do that don't provoke don't stir up things don't make
conflicts where there don't have to be conflicts but the United States leadership doesn't listen very well it's
the same thing that when Putin said many many many times do not expand NATO to
Ukraine the United States oh sorry we don't hear you that's you have nothing to say about that that's none of your
business and then War comes this is very typical of American foreign policy
because American foreign policy leaders are too arrogant and they don't listen
yes and now 61 years since the Cuban Missile Crisis you think we learned our lesson and of course America would never
accept a military Alliance on its doorstep you know say coming down from Canada or something like that well of
course when Cuba aligned with the Soviet Union in 1960 the US idea was invade
that's it it didn't say Oh Mr Castro you could do what you want it's an open door
if you want to be with Soviet Union that's fine with us no it said well we invade so that was 1961 in 1962 in the
repercussions of that and in a really Reckless Gamble and Reckless action by
the Soviet Union putting missiles into Cuba this whole conflict escalated to
just the brink of nuclear war and the Cuban Missile Crisis and then in 1963
both President Kennedy and Soviet chairman Nikita kushev said you know we have to pull back from the brink we have
to live together we should not be coming to the edge of global nuclear war and
they signed the partial nuclear testband treaty in the summer of 1963 proving
that even at the height of the Cold War if the mindset is right you can make peace and that's the mindset that we
need now yes it seems like the neocon mindset that never really went away you
know just help us to understand because to my mind you know Ukraine is not indispensable for the US right it's just
this idea of NATO enlargement but there's other forces behind the scenes that are you know profiting or pushing
and I understand that zalinski you know secured $110 billion dollar in US Aid
and of course humanitarian Financial Military Support also like key Partnerships with you know the Black
Rock Venture Capital firm Goldman Sachs to private ize Ukrainian assets so that
would then deepen the country's debt so help us understand that a little the path forward how do we get out of this
well when the debate raged initially in the 1990s about the wisdom or lack of
wisdom of NATO enlargement which was contrary to what we had promised and was not wise a lobbying campaign took place
in the United States led by the military industrial complex very crude that's how
American politics Works bring out the big bucks so it was Ron and locky Barton
and other big companies became the lobbyists and then you know American congressmen they salute money they
salute campaign contributions they salute the lobbyists and so this is how American politics works there are always
Financial interests that are also playing a role here so we have a mix of ideology confusion lack of historical
sense arrogance and money all stirring the pot it has very little to do with
the American people though the American people are not asked about anything the votes on money for Ukraine are generally
almost secret because they're not really debated they're just measures stuck into
some other piece of legislation so that you never have to debate the fact that we've spent more than $10 billion dollar
so far on Ukraine and nobody's really been asked about it nothing of the
American people haven't really been asked so this is how American politics works now what should be done this war
should end by the United States saying that NATO will not enlarge and Russia
saying we take our troops home that's the core of this that was available in
December 2021 it was available in March 2022 and it's still available now it
doesn't solve many many other issues what happens to the territories what happens to Crimea these are for
negotiations but but the basic idea is that the two superpowers back off and that the war stops and that we go to
political Solutions not military Solutions and that should be our priority and so finally as you think
about the future uh the prospect of nuclear war the kind of world that we're
leaving the Next Generation what would you like young people to know preserve and remember young people should lead
the way to a safer Cooperative people peaceful and environmentally sustainable
and fair world this is the point we need to build the future we want not to feel
trapped in this mindless cycle of violence and environmental destruction
the problems that we Face are solvable and they are not driven by the needs of
the people they're driven by greed or power seeking of Elites and we need to
have a new generation say this is not working we want a world that is at peace
that is shared in prosperity and that solves the environmental crisis which
have become so deep and are neglected in part because we are wasting our time our
lives our resources on these useless Wars no let me say it's the first book
of Western political science is the better way to say it because Plato had written the Republic a generation
earlier but it's the first book of political science it is paired with his
ethics nicomaki and ethics as two joined
volumes because for Aristotle ethics and politics were the
same of course in 15 14 I think it
is makavelli wrote a very different political science he wrote a hand book
for the prince which was about how to maintain
power and political science in the west began to be the science of maintaining
or managing power not the science of producing the good and in fact makavelli was teaching
the prince he was actually making a job application back to the medes because he had been dismissed from the medes
wanting a job back that he was advising the medes how to hold power in
Florence later in The Next Century one of the most influential texts in Western
cultural history was written by Thomas Hobbs the
Leviathan and this was written in 1640 as Western science was taking shape and
Hobbs wanted a scientific theory of human beings
but modeled as individual atoms that collide with each other because for Hobs
there was no longer a cultivation of virtue but rather each individual with
insatiable desires so hobbs' model of human nature
is that it is simply unbounded desire it can't be taught to moderate
desire it can't be cultivated for virtue it is
individualistic and it is insatiable and so hob said unless there
is an overarching power people will kill each other and so we need a leviathan he said
to stop human nature from committing nonstop violence it was
a very pessimistic view of human nature but notice the main point is no longer
was there any idea of developing virtue that was deemed to be impossible instead
one needed institutions to reflect harsh reality
this is the flip of philosophy it's no longer about cultivating the good it is
about controlling the bad then
interestingly and importantly this was
Amplified at the beginning of the 18th century first by a very uh
influential public intellectual Bernard mandaville who
wrote an essay in London called the Fable of the bees and in the Fable of the bees the
most aggressive bees win but they make the hive powerful and
great and if you try to control the avarice or the vice or the aggression of
the bees the hive actually dies so this was now a philosophy of
Empire that power seeking was good because it would make the society
powerful and wealthy and able to dominate over the other
so it was taking Hobs and adding another element one
beehive taking dominance over others and clearly this was a philosophy that appealed to the emerging British
Empire then came Adam Smith six decades later in
1776 and he said in agreement with Hobs and in agreement with mandaville
that human nature is individualistic tastes are
unbounded desire is a great motivator but Market forces will tame
all of that because Market forces will force a kind of competition that will
lead to a socially beneficent
outcome the point is the Anglo-Saxon philosophy Broke Free of more than 1,800
years of Western tradition the Western tradition from
Aristotle and Christianity was an tradition of the common good
virtue and care for the poor by the with the rise of the British
Empire the philosophy came became the benefits of power as a
philosophy and then even the idea that this would lead to quote the common
good but there are two more steps that are important to State the poor became an
enemy because now they were a drag on society so John Lock one of our most
esteemed philosophers wanted very harsh treatment from for the poor so that they
would not be burdens on society and then came
malus Thomas malus wrote after Adam Smith one generation later in
1798 and he proposed something even darker which is that those hives those
different societies are actually in competition for survival with each other
because there are more people produced than can be supported and so life is a battle for
survival and trying to help the poor is inevitably to fail because there will
just be more poor people that was his iron law of
population and it's that led in The Next
Step Darwin took that idea brilliantly from a scientific point of
view to understand natural selection but the later 19th century
philosophers took that idea as a struggle across
Nations and that now Nations or peoples or races were in the struggle for
survival and this became known as social Darwinism and the idea was not not only
should there be no beneficence if you help your own poor you will weaken your Society compared to others and indeed
you're in a struggle for survival and this gave rise to the worst
crimes of History because Nazism actually is a
philosophy which it was was based on social
darwinist pseudo science and this idea the German people will
survive or the Slavic people will survive and so this is a war even to
extermination now this kind of idea led to the worst
cruelties but we are still in a mindset in the western world where it is
competition and struggle that is the
absolute underpinning of society when I studied economics I was
taught about perfect competition I was never taught even one minute about
perfect cooperation the idea doesn't even exist in
economics it's not even developed in one paper that I know of because the idea of cooperation as a
norm doesn't exist it
happened this notion of letting greed motivate
action perhaps did generate the spirit of innovation to
some extent but the way that it was
championed and taught of course led to the worst
excesses so the world became rich and those who were Rich became devoid
of benevolence and compassion and a terrible writer in the
United States who became quite popular aan
Rand a kind of uh popular philosophy oper among young
people and among many politicians wrote a famous essay about
the virtues of selfishness so selfishness became the
virtue actually that's the literal title of an essay it's unbelievable and she is
championed by many still these novels are unbearable to read but they are part
of our philosophy so I went on too long I know because the sign told me to stop five minutes ago
but so that's not very benevolent of me but let me say the
following I believe we've had a deviation from the right path in western
civilization there are roots of Western culture that we can really use to find a
path of virtue and and politics that is
ethical but the anglosaxon version deeply lost this
tradition and there are many fascinating reasons for this but it was mainly the
rise of power of the British Empire which was in many ways an
extremely nasty Empire and the United States learned
everything it knows from the British Empire because it aims to be the
continuation of the British Empire after World War II and this is what needs to end a world
that can return to the common ethical principles of
virtue now let me just conclude by saying I am hopeful that this can
actually happen and I think you at the table need to help lead that and we need
to help explain these things and when
President Xi Jinping launched last year the global civilizations initiative I
think that this is actually an important opening that is very positive
because China has said we should go back to our roots of culture to find a way
forward which I very much subscribe to and the GCI or Global civilizations initiative
is an invitation across civilizational wisdom and I hosted a meeting in Athens
last month co-hosted with the Academy of Athens a Aristotle confucious Symposium
on Ancient wisdom for modern challenges that brought together Chinese and
Western philosophers we didn't have Buddha properly at the table except one very
distinguished Buddhist thinker from Cambodia but we need more of that at the
end of this meeting we agreed that we would have a second
Symposium this time I hope it is the Aristotle Buddha confucious Symposium in
shuu uh in Shandong province in July I
hope we could participate together in that uh we will be back for that many
philosophers are interested in that I will be in shuu in next month uh for the
Nishan uh Forum which is uh also a
philosophical Forum but the Shandong government has asked to host the
follow-up meeting of the Aristotle Buddha confucious uh Symposium and I
believe that this idea of east and
west deep philosophical traditions finding the Deep Humanity that is common
across them is extremely important and powerful and can really
contribute to an understanding which right now does doesn't exist and I think
the failings of this understanding are overwhelmingly on the western side if I
may say so because we are steeped in a philosophy of competition and even war
and this mindset is taken as given but it is actually a recent phenomenon it is
an imperial phenomenon and it needs to be put aside so I I believe that this
actually can be done can I have two more
minutes because I want to talk about Net Zero by 2050 and first to say how much I admire
what Dr Shaw proposed and I I is the book in English also or in Chinese in
Chinese English okay we're going to have to get me an English translation somehow uh if we can
but I'm very eager also to read your forthcoming paper let me add a couple of
things that I think are Central but I think they're already exactly in your uh
climate Club idea it is not possible
to reach net zero one country at a time
least of all for an island we need an interconnected Energy
System region by region because if you are tapping renewable energy it's
intermittent so it's sunny here or windy here this needs
interconnection and East Asia should be interconnected in a common grid
there is a mainland China program called guide
cment cooperation organization that is the China State
grid Engineers who are doing analytical work on
interconnecting Regional grids for Africa for South America for North
America for Europe and for Asia this is
very important work Taiwan should be connected to the
mainland in a power grid and the mainland should be connected with Mongolia and it should be connected
with the Assan countries
and with sub
system it would [Music] be region the economic Powerhouse of the
world rather than a Battleground because this region has
everything if it works together and it could lose everything if
it views the region as a Battleground I think everyone in this
region can understand this the only one that does not is my
country actually but the US needs to be told let
us solve our problems we know how to
discuss don't meddle because you will make a mess
this is actually the truth this is true about Japan
it's of zero carbon energy and all the cooperation that go
would
the regional cooperation the regional structure and
and probably road maps that show the
physical interconnectedness what technologies
where as I've been
saying opposite of a plan it's 80% fossil fuel what plan is that
nothing please don't encourage
them so
show ptic or work I was Sony and I were just in
Beijing with them a couple of days ago we'll come back for a meeting that they're hosting on September 26th uh for
a worldwide meeting on energy interconnections I think that this is really uh uh AB absolutely at the core
so I agree with everything that you said and I think that it's absolutely the way
forward and in that polycentric world there's a concept
which I find very useful it's a concept adopted by the
European Union but a concept that actually started with the Roman Catholic
church and that is the concept of subsidiarity which is that we need
governance at all levels so we need Global governance
Regional governance National governance local governance you put each problem at the
lowest level possible closest to the people where it can be solved but not
below the level at which it can be solved so the power grid cannot be solved at the national level it must be
solved at the regional level the targets for decarbonization
must be solved at the global level and so forth and the idea of subsidiarity is
that we have this multiple levels we have Global governance we have a global
government that can do certain things and not other things we have Regional
government we have national government we have