What Do Westerners Hope?

Published in ZaoBao
(Singapore) on 17 April 2010
by Xie Shengyou (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Tim Lim. Edited by Jessica Boesl.
U.S. President Barack Obama has said that Iran and other nations that violated or withdrew from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty are not exempt from a nuclear weapons strike from the United States government. Iran treated Obama's remarks as a threat that hinted that nuclear weapons may be used against it. Obama believes that if the terrorists were to obtain access to nuclear materials or nuclear weapons, it would be the single biggest threat to U.S. security. Upon conclusion of the Nuclear Security Summit, China still held on to the "double track" strategy on Iran. Beijing did not change its attitude on sanctions against Iran. This was reflected by Hu Jintao not giving as much support to Obama as hoped.

What Do Westerners, Especially Americans, Hope?

Westerners hope to have a rival. Without a rival, the West lives in fear and anxiety. The Cold War is over and Americans are looking for another worthy opponent. We should recognize that America is a free country, where people enjoy and value freedom. We should understand that the freedom of the United States requires a strong external enemy. Without a strong enemy, it is difficult to maintain peace within the United States. The reason is simple; without an external enemy, Americans have to find an enemy among their own people.

"What Should We Do?"

In January 1920, in a debate with Oswald Spengler (1880-1936) in a Munich City Hall conference room, Weber said: "Doctor, where is the ultimate final destination? In your paper, you said that China was in the later stage of being fatigued by civilization. Even so, the Chinese warlords committed suicide by means of wars. The young German, who also was in a situation similar to that of the Chinese warlords, after preserving their lives, chose to write memoirs from the war. In short, in my mind, the Chinese point of view is far superior."

In the introduction to the debate, Ms. Weber said: "Weber is very careful in his criticism by using the most gracious language. He respects ideas that are different from his own. Therefore, his criticisms are widely accepted... When Spengler was gradually losing ground in the debate, he was still able to assert self control and maintain his gentlemanly manner. Those in the debate later found out that no one was able to fully overcome the opponent’s argument and be declared a clear cut winner."

The young audience was enchanted by the wealth of knowledge from both parties. But no one left with a clear answer to the common question of "what should we do?"

The history of the twentieth century confirmed the predictions of the two thinkers. The West has broken into two political systems, namely the system of free capitalist ideology (English law) and an autocratic dictatorship (Soviet Russia’s communism and Germany’s Nazism).

When Westerners, especially the Germans, read Spengler's "Decline of the West" (Der Untergang des Abendlandes. Umrisse einer Morphologie der Weltgeschichte, Band 1: Wien 1918, Band 2: München 1922), they are not as thrilled as when the Chinese read it. Instead, they tend to read it with a sense of crisis. Germany's history of will has always been a sad sense of history.

Huntington (Samuel Phillips Huntington, 1927-2008) is one of Spengler's "patients." After being cured of his mental disease, Huntington attempted to prescribe medication to the United States. In his book "Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order," he did not unearth many new or unique theoretical perspectives. He basically reiterated Spengler’s viewpoints. However, because of Huntington, the West came to realize that the East (especially China) is not so barbaric and uncivilized. Furthermore, the West better understands that civilization is a challenge, and the challenge needs to be fought off. A civilization that fails to recognize and fight the challenge would eventually decline.

Westerners realize this, although Obama would not admit that the post-war proliferation of nuclear weapons is the result of U.S. hegemony. The United States and the United Nations have stood against the interests of the rest of the nations, leading to nuclear proliferation despite repeated containment efforts. Therefore, some terrorists openly stated that the sole purpose of acquiring nuclear or biological weapons is to attack the United States.

If you apply Weber’s words, the United States has trained its own killer. In the future, if the United States were to use the nuclear weapons to self destruct, who will then live to write its memoirs?


西方人希望什么?
[2609] (2010-04-17)
日前美国总统奥巴马说,伊朗等违反或退出《不扩散核武器条约》的国家不在美国政府承诺不使用核武器的对象国之列。伊朗方面认为,奥巴马上述言论意在威胁伊朗,暗示可能对后者动用核武器。奥巴马认为,如果恐怖分子得到核材料或核武器,那将是美国面临的最大的单一安全威胁。核安全峰会闭幕,中国仍对伊朗采取“双轨”策略,北京在制裁伊朗问题上没有改变以往的态度,胡锦涛并没有给予奥巴马希望得到的支持。
  西方人,尤其是美国人希望什么?
  西方人希望有一个对手,如果没有对手,西方人反而感到恐惧和忧虑。冷战结束了,美国人正在寻找对手。我们应该承认,美国是一个自由国家,在那里,人民享受自由,也珍惜自由,我们应该明白,美国的自由需要一个强大的外部敌人,如果美国没有外部强大的敌人,美国就很难维持内部的和平。这个道理其实很简单,因为没有外部敌人,美国人只好在自己内部找自己人成为自己的敌人。
  “我们应该怎么办?”
  1920年1月,韦伯在慕尼黑市政厅会议室与斯宾格勒(Oswald Spengler , 1880 - 1936)辩论:“博士,您提出的最终归宿是在何处呢?您的论述中说到,中国就是处在一种被文明化所倦怠了的那种后期阶段。但是即使这样的话,中国军阀们是以战争来自杀,而处在青年阶段的德国文化中的那些和中国的军阀们处于相类似的地位的一些阁下们,保全了自己的生命后,却写起了战争回忆录。总之,中国人的观点,在我的眼中是站在高于人类的巅峰的立场上,处于一种优越的地位。”
  韦伯夫人介绍当时的辩论时说:“韦伯的批评非常小心,尽量使用最有风度的批评语言。他对别人不同于自己的思想的尊重,使他的批评能为人所接受。……斯宾格勒在自己的思想框架逐渐被人驳倒的时候,倒依然能保持绅士风度,尚能自我控制。不过辩论者发现,对斯宾格勒基本论点的看法,大家谁也说服不了谁。”
  年轻的听众个个被辩论者丰富的知识所淹没,但没有人找到答案,都留下一个共同的问题:“我们应该怎么办?”
  二十世纪的历史证实了两位思想家的预言,西方一分为二:自由资本主义体制(英法等);专制独裁体制(共产主义苏俄和纳粹德国)。
  西方人,尤其是德国人读斯宾格勒的《西方的没落》( Der Untergang des Abendlandes. Umrisse einer Morphologie der Weltgeschichte, Band 1: Wien 1918, Band 2: München 1922) ,没有中国人读时那么兴奋,他们更多的是带有忧患意识,或者说《西方的没落》让他们进一步“沉醉”于忧患意识中。德意志的历史本来就是一部忧患意识的历史。
  亨廷顿(Samuel Phillips Huntington,1927 -2008)是斯宾格勒的一个“病人”,服药病治疗好后,他当医生给美国开药方,在《文明的冲突与世界秩序的重建》一书中却没有提出多少新颖独到的理论观点,他的解释基本上是在炒斯宾格勒的冷饭。但是,因为有亨廷顿,西方人逐渐认识到,东方(尤其中国)不是那么野蛮和蒙昧,西方人更加认识到,文明就是挑战,西方人更加明白,懂得挑战更要懂得应战,失去挑战的文明,不能应战的文明都会衰落。
  西方人认识到,但是奥巴马不承认,战后核武器的扩散正是美国的霸权主义造成的。美国把自己与联合国、与全球其他国家的利益对立起来,导致核扩散屡禁不止。所以,某些恐怖分子也在扬言,他们需要核武器或生化武器的唯一目的,就是要攻击美国。
  如果套用韦伯的话,那就是美国自己培养了自己的杀手,美国将来如果真的以核武来自杀,谁来写回忆录呢?
作者:谢盛友
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Singapore: The Assassination of Charlie Kirk Leaves America at a Turning Point

Austria: Donald Is Disappointed in Vladimir

Taiwan: Trump’s Talk of Legality Is a Joke

Venezuela: China: Authoritarianism Unites, Democracy Divides

Germany: It’s Not Europe’s Fault

Topics

Russia: Trump the Multipolarist*

Turkey: Blood and Fury: Killing of Charlie Kirk, Escalating US Political Violence

Thailand: Brazil and the US: Same Crime, Different Fate

Singapore: The Assassination of Charlie Kirk Leaves America at a Turning Point

Germany: When Push Comes to Shove, Europe Stands Alone*

Guatemala: Fanaticism and Intolerance

Venezuela: China: Authoritarianism Unites, Democracy Divides

Israel: Antisemitism and Anti-Israel Bias: Congress Opens Investigation into Wikipedia

Related Articles

Singapore: Trump’s America Brings More Chaos, but Not Necessarily More Danger

Singapore: No Ukraine Cease-fire – Putin Has Called Trump’s Bluff

Singapore: Lessons from the Trump-Zelenskyy Meltdown – for Friends and Foes

Singapore: In Trump and Musk’s America, Echoes of China’s Past Emerge