Fri, Jun 09, 2017
Taiwan, linear history and
Earth /
By Jerome Keating
<谷歌翻譯>
台灣，歷史進化和地球
由杰羅姆·基廷（Jerome Keating）
美國退出“巴黎協議”自然會使世界各地的評論家和權威人士的言論由於其突然性及其影響而擺在世界各地。
目前，美國在2020年11月4日之前不能正式脫離這一協議的技術現實，批評和判斷依然有道理。
簽約國之間的主要動機是越來越明確地認識到，無論一個國家的大小，所有人都在地球上共享一個共同的家園，與那個家庭是相互依賴的生存的相互目標。
現在地球在氣候變化這個問題上的命運現在可以與任何一個成員國的行動聯繫起來，特別是與美國這樣的大國的行動有關。
這種共同的依賴和責任的現實是在古代猶太學者希勒爾·哈加多爾（Hillel HaGadol）的眾所周知的說法中發現的，他提出了個人和社區的辯證法：“如果我不是為了自己，誰會為我而生;但如果我只是為了自己，我是什麼？如果不是現在，那麼什麼時候？
在從國際上被視為個人的宏觀視角來研究這種辯證法時，很明顯，任何一個國家都可以而且應該有合法的利益，但國家的利益絕不應該犧牲地球和所有人的生存。
雖然更大的負擔來自更大和更有影響力的國家的競爭力，但這並不意味著他們可以忽視他人的需求。
例如，喬治·奧威爾（George Orwell）在他的預言小說1984中畫出的反烏托邦思想。
根據他在第二次世界大戰結束時所知道的，奧威爾（Orwell）預測一個分為三大競爭力量的世界：大洋洲，歐亞大陸和東亞，似乎總是在相互戰爭，並試圖控制剩餘的其他地區。
奧威爾思想的確切性可能是有爭議的，但在當今世界，確實有三大權力：美國，俄羅斯和中國。這三個國家的國家利益往往相互爭奪，所以其他國家，特別是小國，往往會在零和遊戲中受苦。
更深層次的問題是，三大國家的許多人仍然對歷史進行循環的觀點，只有看到他們的偉大才能回歸到榮耀的日子。
他們看不到人的生命和行為是線性的，並且變得越來越相互依存。
過程是規範，世界不斷變化，範圍變小。可能會有回歸，因為進程並不總是進步，而是世界繼續進行。
人們再也不能回家了新的全球範式正在發展。
美國總統唐納德·特朗普（Donald Trump）“讓美國再次偉大”的選舉承諾是一個這樣的失落的哭泣。
那些錯過20世紀50年代以前的輝煌時光的人主要得到支持，美國製造業不受戰爭蹂躪，導致了世界。
那些人沒有看到美國製造業有意向海外遷移，是因為全球在全球競爭激烈的市場上，廉價勞動力生產的廉價消費品的願望。
台灣在二十世紀八十年代就學到了這樣一個教訓，現在在思想上是線性的，並不是追求一黨狀態，而是美國還是回頭看。
俄羅斯總統弗拉基米爾•普京（Vladimir Putin）在俄羅斯總理弗拉基米爾·普京（Vladimir Putin）的追捧下，試圖懷舊地回到蘇聯的前一天和前幾天。它想要恢復過去的控制，同時仍然允許其新發現的資本主義寡頭。
中國當然希望通過保持滿洲征服，尋求忘記“恥辱世紀”的土地，回到中國的榮耀日子，但現在面臨新的挑戰，因為兩位數的國內生產總值增長已經不可能，對透明度的要求隨著人口的增長而增加。它可能不會像俄羅斯那樣避免同樣的命運。
這三個國家都面臨著自己的問題，認為可以通過循環恢復過去的偉大來解決問題。
所有這些都沒有看到線性歷史，以及如何“縮小地球”，Hillel的概念表明，範式轉變是有序的。
在新世界秩序中，任何一個國家都不能成為統治地位的領導者。除了國家的利益外，所有國家都必須願意共同保護家庭的行星。
寫作70多年前，奧威爾可以免除各種遺漏。他在第二次世界大戰結束時寫了關於國家的具體情況，特別是中等規模國家沒有發揮關鍵作用的世界。
奧威爾不可能預期歐盟由中型國家組成;他本來不知道如何處理Brexit。
他也看不到像非洲這樣的中等規模國家的龐大大陸的未來重要性，他不能預見到一個像台灣這樣的國家的挑戰。
在中等規模國家中，也許最大的異常和挑戰就是台灣。
台灣的人口超過了聯合國70％以上，國內生產總值大於全國的80％。在全球競爭力約200個國家中排名第14，甚至認真對待Hillel的話：這本身就是其他的。
按照一切標準，它應該被認為是一個偉大的貢獻者，但不是。
台灣被一個國家的自私所束縛，給世界帶來了持續的危險，包括地球的健康。例如，世衛組織世界衛生大會不允許其知識淵博的代表。
按照Hillel的話，大多數歐盟成員國的領導層感覺到國家不能只為自己而設。
現在看來，英國首相特里薩·瑪麗特（Theresa May）想要更強大的手進Brexit談判，很有可能不會這樣做，而在美國，許多城市和國家正在抵制特朗普決定撤出巴黎協議並承諾遵守
特朗普必須再次面對這樣一個事實：雖然他因選舉團的怪癖而獲勝，但他卻以三百萬的投票失利，而在俄羅斯方面，無論如何，它不會重獲許多東部封鎖的國家。
台灣的雙重異常可以是一個燈塔，並在這個不斷變化的景觀中發揮燈塔的作用。其他國家，特別是中等規模的國家，可以感受到它所接受的信譽，同時承認其獨特的突出地位。
台灣一定是為了自己，而且也是對全球社會的承諾。現在是全球社會接受和歡迎台灣現實的時候了。
Fri, Jun 09, 2017
Taiwan, linear history and
Earth
By Jerome Keating
The US’ withdrawal from the
Paris Agreement has naturally set the tongues of commentators and pundits all
over the world wagging, because of its abruptness and its implications.
Ignore for the moment the
technical reality that the US cannot formally extricate itself from this accord
before Nov. 4, 2020; the criticisms and judgements are still justified.
A prime motive among signatory
nations is the growing and expressed realization that whatever a nation’s size,
all people share a common home on planet Earth, and with that home is the
mutual goal of interdependent survival.
The fate of the Earth in issues
like climate change can now be linked to the actions of any and all member
nations, but in particular to the actions of larger nations like the US.
The reality of this shared
dependency and responsibility is found in the well-known saying of the ancient
Jewish scholar Hillel HaGadol, in which he presented the dialectic of
individual and community: “If I am not for myself, who will be for me; but if I
am only for myself, what am I? If not now, then when?”
In examining this dialectic
from a macro perspective where nations are seen as individuals in a community
of nations, it is clear that any nation can and should have legitimate
self-interests, but that national self-interest should never be at the expense
of the planet and the survival of all.
While a greater burden falls on
the competitiveness of larger and more influential nations, that does not mean
that they can ignore the needs of others.
For example, the dystopia
George Orwell painted in his prophetic novel 1984 comes to mind.
Based on what he knew at the
end of World War II, Orwell projected a world that was divided into three
competing powers: Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia, which seemed to always be at
war with each other and be seeking to control the remaining other territories.
The exactness of Orwell’s
thought could be contested, but in today’s world, there are indeed three major
powers: the US, Russia and China. The national interests of these three are
frequently in contention with each other, and so other nations — particularly
smaller nations — will often suffer in their zero-sum games.
A deeper issue is that many
people in the three major nations still maintain a cyclic perspective on
history and can only see their greatness as a return to the glory days of yore.
They fail to see that human
life and actions are linear and are becoming more interdependent.
Process is the norm and the
world continues to change and become smaller in scope. There might be
regression, because process is not always progress, but the world continues in
process.
People can never go home again;
a new global paradigm is developing.
The election promise of US President
Donald Trump to “make America great again” is one such lost cry.
It is primarily supported by
those who miss the past glory days of the 1950s when US manufacturing,
untouched by the ravages of war, led the world.
Those people fail to see that
US manufacturing purposely moved overseas because of the nation’s desire for
cheap consumer goods produced by cheap labor in a globally competitive market.
Taiwan learned this lesson in
the 1980s — it is now linear in thinking and does not seek to return to its
one-party state days, but the US still looks back.
Russia under President Vladimir
Putin seeks to nostalgically return to the pre-perestroika and pre-glasnost
days of the Soviet Union where Russia was a much stronger power under the
banner of Marx. It wants a return to past control while still allowing for its
newfound capitalist oligarchies.
China of course wishes to
return to Middle Kingdom glory days by keeping the lands the Manchus conquered
and seeking to forget their “century of humiliation,” but it now faces new
challenges as double-digit GDP growth is no longer possible and a demand for
transparency increases while its population ages. It might not avoid the same
fate as Russia.
Each of these three nations
faces its own problems and thinks they can be solved by a cyclic restoration of
past greatness.
All fail to see linear history
and how with a “shrinking planet,” Hillel’s concepts demonstrate that a
paradigm shift is in order.
In the new world order, no one
nation can be the dominant leader. In addition to national self-interest, all
nations must be willing to jointly protect the home planet.
Writing more than 70 years ago,
Orwell can be excused for various omissions. He wrote about nations at the end
of World War II and in particular a world where mid-sized states had not
established their key role.
Orwell could not have
anticipated an EU made up of mid-sized nations; he would have had have no idea
how it would deal with Brexit.
He could also not see the
future importance of a vast continent full of mid-sized nations like Africa,
and he could not have foreseen the challenge of a nation like Taiwan.
Among the mid-sized nations,
perhaps the greatest anomaly and challenge is that of Taiwan.
Taiwan has a population larger
than 70 percent of the nations in the UN and its GDP is larger than 80 percent
of all nations. It is No. 14 among about 200 nations in global competitiveness,
and even takes the words of Hillel seriously: It is for itself, but it is also
for others.
By all standards, it should be
recognized as a great contributor, but it is not.
Taiwan is shut out by the
selfishness of one nation, and that provides a continuous danger to the world,
including the health of the planet. For example, its knowledgeable
representatives were not allowed in the WHO’s World Health Assembly.
Following the words of Hillel,
leadership in most EU member states sense that the nation cannot be only for
themselves.
It also now appears that
British Prime Minster Theresa May, who wanted a stronger hand going into Brexit
talks, will most likely not get it, while in the US, many cities and states are
resisting Trump’s decision to pull out of the Paris accord and promising to
abide by it.
Trump must once again face the
fact that although he won by the quirk of the electoral college, he lost by 3
million votes, and in Russia, whatever happens, it will not regain many of the
Eastern block countries it lost.
The double anomaly of Taiwan
can be a beacon, and play a beacon’s role in this changing landscape. Other
nations, particularly mid-sized ones, can sense the discredit it has received
while acknowledging its distinctive prominence.
Taiwan must be for itself, but
it also remains committed to the global community. It is time for the global
community to accept and welcome the reality of Taiwan.
Jerome Keating is a commentator
in Taipei.
沒有留言:
張貼留言
發表意見者，請留稱呼。用匿名不留稱呼者，一律自動刪除。