Re: China the Hegemon?

Hello Dr. Nguyen

Thank you for an enlightening writing.

Communications on the captioned matter, nothing scientific perhaps in the 
eyes
of a CASE worker, are based on the dream as to what (research) could or 
should
be done to understand the banner waving aspects of global conflict before
buttons could be pushed and destroy those dreams.  Certainly, intentions of
nations could put research grants in the hands of scientists who put buttons
in the hands of peace makers.  Unless of course, you are suggesting national
intentions do not support peaceful movements.

Your elaboration on association of the Chinese Japanese and the Germans 
would
be very much appreciated.

Your passing comments on Chinese culture is thought provoting, for which I
thank you.  If parallels could be drawn from the oil producing culture of 
the
Middle Eastern States and China, I would be grateful for reading 
suggestions.
Reading based, of course, on scientific research.

War-mongering and cultural specific attibutes are, in my humble opinion, 
very
much part and parcel of hegomonic transformations.  Military power supported
developments of world-empires.

The question remains to be answered with systemic logic, and I believe, the
questions are answerable with the WST model.

Awaiting your scientific fromulation of the answers,  I wish all our dreams
for peace and sustainability will come true.

Regards, K.S.Tso

Aiviet Nguyen ¼g¤J¡G

>   Thanks. Very well and politely said.
>   A scientific analysis just cannot be  based on a personal dream nor on
> national intentions.
>   To me, the chinese is a peace loving nation exactly as the germans and
> japanese are.
>   The chinese culture is among the brightest ones in the world like the
> Iraqian and Iranian ones.
>   Hegemony maybe not related too much to those attributes.
>   Whether China will be a hegemon is a quite different question. I don't
> know the answer and haven't say a single word about it. However, I am very
> interested in different serious viewpoints in this topic.
>
> On Wed, 15 Mar 2000, Boris Stremlin wrote:
>
> > To the best of my knowledge, no one in the world-systems camp is
> > advocating the stepping up of tensions between the US and China.  The
> > disagreement is over the LIKELIHOOD of such conflict in the medium-run
> > future.  It bears adding that in assessing this likelihood, it is
> > important not to overemphasize single factors, such as any imputed
> > "peaceful intentions" on the part of either country, nor the role of
> > joint economic interests.  It is quite evident that there are parties on
> > both sides of the Pacific which are interested in aggravating the
> > conflict, that one cannot draw a clear distinction in all cases between
> > "bargaining" and war-mongering, and that historical precedents do not
> > determine the ultimate success of the bargainers' policies.
> >
> > --
> > Boris Stremlin
> > bc70219@binghamton.edu