Jeffrey Sachs 美國政治結果現在很糟糕

傑弗裏·薩克斯:  美國政治結果現在很糟糕

Jeffrey Sachs, US political outcome is bumb now

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

April 3, 2024

[中東]

中國正在介入美國破壞穩定的政策，而且這種政策具有破壞性； 中國在中東的某些情況下正在介入； 作為和平締造者，而且成本更低； 如果我們能夠很好地實現和平，這可能是近年來最引人注目的外交成就； 我想說的是，中國是在促成沙特阿拉伯和伊朗之間達成和平協議嗎？ 在美國人看來，這兩個國家是不共戴天的敵人。 他們永遠不會同意並支持美國； 伊朗是敵人，沙特阿拉伯是盟友； 但美國外交政策的整體理念是，你將各國作為美國的盟友置於你的管轄之下； 就像沙特阿拉伯一樣，你在另一邊與你的敵人作戰； 但中國卻有不同的看法，沙特和伊朗之間的分歧並沒有根本原因； 但他們有充足的合作理由； 一方麵，他們都受到氣候變化的嚴重打擊； 他們需要合作； 因為水危機相當嚴重； 它們都是碳氫化合物經濟體； 他們需要能源轉型，這是非常深刻的，因此中國人促成了兩者之間的和解； 我很高興通過苦澀之間的鬥爭方式和解； 伊朗和沙特阿拉伯之間分裂了西亞； 它導致了也門一場絕對毀滅性的戰爭； 美國提供的軍事支持導致大量人員死亡； 它穩定了一個需要大量經濟轉型和技術升級和變革的地區；
因此，這項協議對整個地區來說確實是一個很大的幫助，不僅是對所涉及的兩個國家，而且在我看來，中國獲得了很多讚譽，因為它有智慧看到這場衝突是可以解決的，而不僅僅是加劇； 但美國的做法始終是推動它，即使美國與伊朗達成協議； 美國政府放棄了名為《聯合全麵行動計劃》的核協議； 然後維持對伊朗的製裁； 因為美國並不真正認真地致力於和平； 大多數時候，它都有美國對抗他們的心態； 我發現這極具破壞性，不符合美國的利益； 是的; 我希望中方能夠保持這一明智的做法； 因為台灣現在發生的事情很危險，這有助於了解你們之間的代理人戰爭和中國可能發生的事情之間的情況； 台灣的局勢就像烏克蘭的局勢一樣，非常具有爆炸性，非常危險，需要冷靜的頭腦來避免衝突； 事實是，實際上所有三個政府； 我想說的是，美國、台灣和中國有一個中國的政策； 無論是台灣政府還是北京政府，他們都說有一個中國，他們對1949年發生的事情有不同意見； 以及中國應該如何治理； 但他們沒有說有兩個國家，美國在與中華人民共和國建交時就非常明確地說，隻有一個中國，有一個對華政策，那就是如何維護和平並確保 北京和台北之間的緊張關係不會演變成公開衝突； 但美國卻開始玩弄這個； 開始與台灣形成實際上的軍事同盟，真正進入一國中間的軍事同盟； 這是一件極其危險和不謹慎的事情，拜登開始談論我們將如何保衛台灣，而美國政客則談論戰爭是如何發生的

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

我發現這個問題的核心有兩個因素，一個是二戰後； 美國與中央情報局和其他據稱確保國家安全的機構建立了一個安全國家； 但實際上; 他們確實削弱了民主。

因為中央情報局的首要原則就是保密，行動保密； 它在世界各地做了很多不好的事情； 但它們是秘密的，所以這確實破壞了美國的民主； 我們對外交政策沒有太大的公共影響力； 例如在美國，因為真正涉及外交政策時； 總統和其他一些人在沒有公開辯論或不受任何真正民主機構控製的情況下代表所有人做出決定； 除了每隔幾年投票一次之外； 但這還不夠，因為我們一直在為損害美國人民的利益而發動戰爭； 這是問題的一部分，我之前提到的問題的另一部分是政治中的大筆資金； 一些國家限製私人競選融資； 事實上，大多數歐洲國家的政治製度並沒有太多腐敗現象； 但美國； 我認為這是一種合法的腐敗； 法律是合法的，因為我們的最高法院規定，公司可以在政治上為所欲為； 沒有限製和/或很少的限製； 結果就是我們的選舉周期； 2024 年大選將花費大約 1150 億美元的競選資金； 現在你找不到一個有這麽多錢的誠實政府； 易手後，你會得到出價最高者購買的政府，這就是為什麽對民主的信心大幅下降的原因； 你當然提到了大資金的力量我我不會對歐洲的情況那麽樂觀； 我隻是相信，因為經濟疲軟； 然後沒有美國那麽多錢； 但實際的趨勢是； 你提到的喬·拜登，當然，當時的特朗普總統可能會在明年的選舉中見麵； 您可能看到了領導力危機嗎？ 因為當我們回顧過去時，我們看到許多來自歐洲和美國的強有力的領導人，他們能夠提供一些願景和領導社會，其中一些人甚至致力於建立一個和平的社會；

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; 

傑弗裏·薩克斯 (Jeffrey Sachs)：美國政治結果現在很糟糕

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

2024 年 4 月 3 日

好吧，我想說美國民主的質量已經下降, 在我的一生中，嗯，也許這是一種幻覺，但我感覺到了，而且, 我甚至從數據中就可以看出，60年來人們對政府的信心增強了
比他們今天更早，我看著那個，我當然已經花了我的全部時間
生活試圖理解人們對我們政府的信心不斷下降，我發現
呃，這個問題的核心有兩個因素，那就是二戰後
美國與中央情報局和其他機構建立了一個安全國家
據稱是確保國家安全的機構，但實際上
他們確實削弱了民主，因為中央情報局的首要原則是
它是秘密的，它的行動也是秘密的，它做了很多事情
世界不好但它們是秘密所以這真的被破壞了
美國民主，嗯，我們沒有，我們沒有太多
公共對外交政策的影響，例如在美國，因為
當談到外交政策時，確實是總統和其他一些人
在沒有公開辯論或不受控製的情況下代表所有人做出決定
除了一次投票之外的任何真正民主的機構
每隔幾年，但這還不夠，因為我們一直在為反對美國的利益而進行戰爭
人們嗯，所以這是問題的一部分，我之前提到的問題的另一部分是個大問題
政治資金一些國家限製私人競選資金
事實上，歐洲大多數國家的政治製度並沒有太多腐敗現象，但是
我認為美國的腐敗是合法的，因為
我們最高法院說企業可以在政治上為所欲為
沒有限製或很少限製，結果就是我們的選舉周期
2024 年選舉可能會花費 1 15
十億美元的競選資金現在你得不到誠實的政府有這麽多錢易手你得到
政府是由最高出價者購買的，這就是為什麽
對民主的信心已經下降了很多，你當然提到了大國的力量
錢我我我不會對歐洲的情況那麽樂觀我隻是相信因為經濟疲軟
那麽呃，那裏沒有美國那麽多錢，但是趨勢實際上呃幾乎是一樣的呃你你
提到了喬·拜登，當然，當時的特朗普總統可能會在
在明年的選舉中，你可能會看到領導層的危機嗎
因為當我們回顧過去時，我們看到許多強有力的領導人都來自
來自美國的歐洲人能夠提供一些願景和領導者社會，其中一些人甚至朝著
和平社會我們提到比爾品牌奧拉夫帕爾默我們也可以提到我們也可以提到拉爾德德蘭呃作為
特殊類型的美國遺產以及呃我想說有一定的
這些領導力品質的下降你也這麽認為嗎，因為在
歐洲，我認為非常明顯，是的，我認為政治質量
總體而言，目前美國和歐洲的領導力非常薄弱
美國呃我們有呃兩位領先的候選人其中一位是81
他再也找不到離開舞台的路了，他碰巧是我們的總統，
另一個是被定罪的呃是被多重定罪的呃
呃呃心理不穩定的人呃現在麵臨幾十個罪犯呃
現在在即將到來的審判中很重要，所以也許我們會有一個
八十多歲的老人誰不應該跑步，一個被定罪的重罪犯呃跑步
對於總統來說，這顯然是一件可怕的事情呃
我們怎樣才能到達那裏還有其他一些候選人我希望羅伯特
小肯尼迪呃證明自己是一位非常有能力的候選人，我喜歡他
我們是同學我們是朋友呃呃他來自一個偉大的政治家
事實上，傳統呃他的叔叔呃約翰·F·肯尼迪在我看來是最後一位偉大的人物
美國總統呃因為在那之後我們有一些
非常友善和聰明的人，少數人不多，吉米·卡特就是其中之一，但是嗯
我們有很多失敗的總統和失敗的總統任期，所以
領導力相當低，在歐洲這也讓我感到驚訝
當美國做出如此糟糕的錯誤判斷時，歐洲領導人往往會如何
跟隨美國的領導，當然我對此非常不滿意
烏克蘭戰爭 我的意思是每個人都對此不滿意，但我的觀點與主流有所不同
在我看來，烏克蘭戰爭是由美國引起的
想要擴大北約 呃，呃，當然呃
許多歐洲人說不不不，這都是普京的事，他這麽做了，但我知道
足夠多的曆史，我參加了足夠多的活動，知道美國有多少
通過絕對愚蠢的政策引發了這場戰爭，因為如果你聰明的話
你沒有推動軍事聯盟對吧針對俄羅斯邊境 呃，那是
俄羅斯對軍事極其敏感並不是明智之舉
西方國家正在侵占它，因為俄羅斯已經被侵略了多少次
西方，尤其是當美國政客擁有如此多的權力時
他們公開表達了對俄羅斯的敵意
應該拆除，還有許多其他事情，當然俄羅斯會將國家擴張視為對國家的直接威脅
國家安全不會讓它發生，所以這隻是一個例子
可怕的政策可預見的災難
但美國現在同意了我的觀點是歐洲人更清楚我
知道，因為很多歐洲人告訴過我很多次哦，北約向烏克蘭擴張
非常危險，但他們不會在公共場合說出來，呃，呃，他們不會說出來
在公共場合，因為美國會生他們的氣，你知道
他們害怕美國，他們不應該害怕美國，歐洲應該有自己獨立的外交政策
它應該了解自己的利益呃而且利益不僅僅是
跟隨美國所以這隻是一個非常重要的
現在歐洲和美國政治領導層軟弱的例子是的，我們我們
在這裏看得很清楚，所以他們實際上甚至無法製定國家利益，我不知道是否
如果是恐懼或者隻是他們無法理解正在發生的事情，那麽可能是兩者的結合
當然，你提到的後果對歐盟在經濟和政治上都是災難性的
一位一位歐洲政治領導人幾年前對我說，哦，他們
不要在華盛頓認真對待我們，嗯，他說得更厲害
色彩繽紛，我不會完全重複，但呃這是一個專業的領導者
國家，我的想法是是的，但你不應該讓自己受到對待
那樣的話，那是你的錯，不是美國的錯，是的，美國很傲慢
但為歐洲挺身而出，呃，這應該是方法，但不是
方法，因為我認為我們已經為 aan 涵蓋了很多基礎，並且我們已經聽到了
很多事情都非常有前途，這很好，因為我們需要一些呃
樂觀和一些方向
呃如何克服一些重大挑戰
現在如果我們退後一步
危機，看看呃一些非常
嗯世界的基本趨勢我們有很多理由
樂觀事實上呃世界經濟和世界社會作為一個整體已經變得
毫無疑問，預期壽命比 100 年前好得多
世界收入顯著增加
如果按以下標準衡量，現在平均每人 20,000 美元
國際價格，如果按市場價格計算，每人約 122,000 美元
這是收入的巨大增長
健康和呃飲食質量
醫療保險的保護以及許多其他的確實
我們物質生活的基本組成部分以及肖博士對中國的描述
這對 40 年來的 14 億人來說絕對是不可思議的
嗯，雖然沒有完全按照這個速度實現，但在許多方麵都取得了非常廣泛的成就
世界以及這些進步的根本原因是科學
技術知識已經進步並繼續進步，即使在
加速速度所以我們有能力
解決實際挑戰確實是前所未有的，現在我們的財富是
史無前例，我們的專業知識也是史無前例的，這確實是
對我們能做什麽以及做什麽非常樂觀的根本原因
我們在未來幾年應該做的事情是，我們學到的是
至少有三三
世界運作方式的根本問題，這就是帶來的
我們參加這次研討會以及是什麽讓我們實現了可持續發展目標
首先，隨著所有這些進步，還有數十億人
那些實際上已經落後於這一進步的人
由於各種原因人們生活在更偏遠的地方
地區或地理位置非常不利或屬於少數群體的一部分
在社會中受到虐待的群體或一半人口是婦女
傳統上不屬於市場經濟的女孩現在是市場經濟的一部分
家庭經濟確實取得了進步，但麵臨著
今天仍然存在許多社會障礙，這就是為什麽可持續發展之一
發展目標專門針對性別問題
SG5 所以三個巨大的挑戰之一是我們擁有一個富裕的世界和很多
那個世界上非常貧窮和受苦受難的人們，那就是
呃我認為對於我們大多數人來說
這是不可接受的，事實上，當聯合國成立時
1948年所有成員國一致認為應該製定基本標準
地球上每個人的生活，因為他們是地球上的人
因為他們是人類，而世界的生產力足以確保
每個人都有尊嚴，這就是為什麽要製定《世界人權宣言》人權
已被通過，我認為我們仍在努力履行該宣言，該宣言似乎
我是基本點，所以第一個問題就是
發展不平衡的事實仍然存在
今天，世界上有很大一部分人生活在非常貧困的境地
剝奪，這是第一個挑戰，我認為
這在道德上可能是頭號挑戰，因為極端貧困
一個豐盛的世界絕對是呃
如果我們不解決這個問題，就會破壞我們全人類，所以這就是為什麽
可持續發展目標 1 是赤貧問題，而可持續發展目標 2 是
第二要務是結束饑餓，當然還有很大的挑戰
如何做到這一點，但我會說，在一個財富和知識的世界裏，這是
絕對觸手可及，如果平均收入是
人均 112,000 美元 有些人的生活水平隻有 100 美元，而
世界還在繼續，他們受苦、英年早逝、麵臨可怕的困難
第二個大挑戰 巨大的挑戰 比第一關更難的謎題
第一個概念是我們在大約 50 年前發現的
我們經濟發展的本質就是我剛才談到的所有財富都是環境因素
具有破壞性，因為大肆吹噓的經濟
進程不關心它們的物理
副產品，其中一些不被理解
直到 50 或 100 年前，就像溫室一樣
氣體及其對氣候的影響需要科學的研究
突破了一個相當深的秩序，以了解它是在年底到來的
19世紀，然後至少花了75年的時間才創造出來
測量係統來驗證科學，我們從 1980 年左右就或多或少地知道，人類確實是
以可能危險的方式改變氣候，而我們仍在掙紮
有了這個事實，因為是什麽首先給我們帶來了財富
1800年代是化石燃料，然後我們發現了大約一半哦
這些都是危險的，不好的，所以這是第二個大問題是
我們有一個經濟體係和一套法律規則和全球公域
公海和許多其他因素
我們的經濟體係意味著呃現在的生產規模
自我毀滅，正如我所說，我們在理智上已經理解了這一點，至少 70 年，至少大約 50 年，嗯，它
第一次關於這一事實的會議是在 50 年前舉行的
51 年前，第一本關於增長限製的好書問世
並明確表示確實存在問題，但我們尚未解決
這個問題，但讓我像第一個一樣規定以下內容
一 這些環境沒有什麽根本性的
即使以我們現有的知識庫來看，挑戰也超出了我們的解決方案
換句話說，我們已經在 2023 年擁有了技術範圍
90%溫室的解決方案
氣體不是 100% 我們絕對不會
麵臨食物和自然之間的選擇我們麵臨著呃之間的選擇
破壞性和非破壞性糧食生產之間存在很大差異
這是我 40 年來在這方麵的工作中從未找到過的選擇
經濟福祉和環境的根本障礙
可持續性，所以我不屬於去增長學派，它說
我們真正需要的是扭轉經濟發展，而不是所有經濟發展
發展有利於人類福祉，這是另一回事，但我不同意我們已經
創造了一種完全
不符合我們的環境
我們所擁有的必需品或我們的環境福祉或健康是
經濟體係法律體係監管存在很大缺陷
係統激勵結構，以便我們采用或繼續采用以下技術：
非常不明智，做了很多愚蠢的事情，因為可以從這些愚蠢的事情中賺錢
而不是做我們應該做的事情，而我在我的所有經曆中都沒有看到過
經曆過的任何計算都表明，做正確的事情超出了我們的能力範圍
超出我們的預算超出我們的經濟
意味著例如關於能量轉換為a的所有估計
零碳能源係統表明，世界產出的 1% 或 2%
需要做出改變，這真的很奇怪，不是
需要的是世界產出的 50%，但這並不是說
災難性的昂貴，我們注定會像小行星一樣
即將撞擊地球，我們無事可做，不，我們已經清楚非常非常清楚
要做的事情有時我們有太多的可能性
要做的事情，所以我們不知道該選擇哪一個，所以我們陷入癱瘓，應該選擇風能、太陽能還是
核或這個我不知道我們現在不會做任何事情我們正在賺錢
我們正在做的事情讓我們陷入癱瘓，或者我們知道該怎麽做，但有
強大的既得利益者說不要這樣做，因為我在短期內賺了太多錢
做破壞性的事情或者事情很複雜並且沒有被考慮過
出去正確的是，因為這是絕對新的東西
建造燃煤電廠很簡單，但也許沒那麽簡單
由於存儲或其他原因而建造海上風力或太陽能發電場或其他設施
其他問題，所以它們隻是複雜性，但這是第二大問題
我們麵臨的挑戰類別是經濟
環境碰撞過程再次需要分析，然後需要
詢問問題對我來說有多深以及問題的可解決性如何，所以
氣候危機非常嚴重，但也相當嚴重
可以解決，有一些謎題絕對應該是什麽大海洋
油輪運行是否應該是氫燃料電池是否應該是氨應該
這是氫氣燃燒我不是工程師我聽過他們的爭論
工程師 我希望他們奮力拚搏 我希望他們嚐試不同的方式
方法，但顯然我們應該在第三次嚐試這些技術
大挑戰，亙古不變的挑戰
我們似乎很難停止互相殘殺
其他因此戰爭變得更加危險
因為武器變得更具破壞性，現在我們
技術如此聰明，以至於我們想出了如何摧毀整個
該死的人類，如果我們不那麽聰明，我們就不會擁有這個
麻煩，但一些天才發現你可以讓核捕魚發揮作用
順便說一句，世界上大概有 50 個人製造了一顆炸彈
理解了這一點，他們弄清楚了，然後他們把它交給了一個世界
白癡，所以我們有很多愚蠢的人負責核武器和
它們是由一些天才製作的，這是我們的問題，所以這是我們的第三期
在我看來，如何保持平和與合作是三大要素
我們麵臨的問題是如何做到公平和體麵
對於那些正在遭受苦難的人們，如何確保我們不會
自我毀滅，因為我們的經濟體係實際上是一套複雜的體係
激勵措施並不能把事情做好，我們的方法也沒有什麽魔力
組織我們的經濟生活來處理溫室氣體等問題
不在亞當·斯密的《國富論》中，也不屬於
呃，自由市場可以解決的事情等等，第三個是這個
這是一個無休無止的問題，如果你讀過人類曆史，我們大部分時間都在互相爭鬥，但也有
也有一線希望，希望有長期的和平，我們也有
和平機構就像我們有戰爭機構一樣，這是讓我感到自豪的事情之一
對中國崛起相當樂觀的一點是，中國在政治上更加和平。
曆史比世界上任何其他地區都要悠久，而且
中國過去2000年的國家間戰爭實際上是相當低的
基本上是來自北方的牧民的戰爭
久坐不動的農民試圖將它們擊退，呃，這就是中國的大部分
2000年的戰爭如果你看看歐洲的戰爭，那就是跨越分水嶺互相殘殺
一千年不間斷，所以中國至少有一個和平的
我覺得這個傳統很符合和諧社會的理念
對於全球文明等等的想法，我是一個相當樂觀的人
不得不說這一點，因為我認為呃實際上有一個很深的
紮根，這就是我們消除貧困所要做的一切
保護環境停止互相殘殺好嗎
所以謝謝你 不行 那我們該怎麽辦
在我看來，最基本的事情是我們應該認真考慮其中的每一個
然後提出最基本的計劃
這個想法聽起來很愚蠢，為什麽我要這麽說
40 年後我沒有什麽更明智的話要說，事情是
我們的社會係統運作的方式不是思考然後解決
這些事情非常有趣，我們的經濟體係是
圍繞不同的原則設計，即讓人們做什麽
他們想要致富，去找你的工作，呃，買你想要的東西
想要但不解決問題，因此在經濟領域它不麵向
解決問題，以做企業應該做的事情為導向
為了盈利，我們應該成為好的消費者，我們應該在我們追求的工作中聰明，但是
至少在市場經濟中是這樣的
盎格魯撒克遜世界的主導意識形態
那麽這個世界不是為了解決問題而是去做你的事所以不要
期望這些問題的答案來自經濟領域
或者從商界來看，他們的工作不是經營一家企業，而是
賺錢所以這是第一個問題
我們不考慮經濟領域的最終目標，我們應該隻是
做我們的事，然後大多數政治中的政客都不是
關於解決問題，這是關於維護
權力，這甚至是目標，你有維持權力的專家
政客們身邊有小人物，他們告訴他們，這就是你要留在英國所需要做的
力量，這就是你的目標所以政治至少在我看來
這個國家與任何目標都沒有什麽關係 我不知道美國人會做什麽
目標是我們沒有目標我們有一些英雄我們的成立
父親們，我們熱愛憲法，我們喜歡 7 月 4 日獨立日，但我們沒有
目標，甚至當我聽到肖博士談論中國的
你不可能在美國實現這些目標
目標，因為就是那樣
社會主義呃你不被允許有目標所以政治沒有導向
真正解決問題的關鍵在於權力的管理
權力競爭 掌握權力 從權力中受益，所以我們
大多數時候我們的政府沒有看到這些大目標以及如何實現
解決這些問題 我真的認為中國在過去 40 年的這個時期有所不同
與大多數其他政府相比，我認為成功就是這樣的結果
事實上，這確實是，為什麽我認為這個問題非常有趣，但是
嗯，一些國家有時有非常明確的目標，也許是因為
生存也許是因為他們過去的曆史也許因為他們有
成功的呃鄰居呃所以他們想模仿成功也許就像
新加坡因為有一位天才來了 leuan Yu，他有一個非常非常清晰的想法
真正的新加坡，這是一位非常清晰、才華橫溢的思想家的案例
他隻是像柏拉圖的哲學家國王一樣指導了很長一段時間，但大多數
現在政治不是這樣的
所以我們沒有看到很多這個問題的解決來自
政府，第三件事是在我國，它成為最
過去75年軍事上一直是世界強國
他們確實認為打仗是治理的重要組成部分
瘋狂又危險，可能會害死我們所有人
被殺，以便第三類正義和平合作不會到來
我們每天都很容易在美國報紙上讀到一些仇恨中國的內容
現在我每天都讀報紙
今天中國有全球文明倡議，精彩你講到了
今天我剛讀到這太可怕了這是你知道的中國的出處
老實說，現在通過這種方式在世界範圍內，這是一種心態
非常非常深，可能在下雨的時候
我們的進化也因為可能曾經有一段時間，無論誰都可以
控製下一個水坑就可以生存，不控製的人就無法生存，這是
我們或他們，現在的世界不是這樣的，我們不是我們，也不是他們
不需要占據任何其他地方來享受幸福期，沒有
客廳的危機隻有理解的危機，不殺戮的危機
另一邊好吧，那麽我們該怎麽做才能得出結論我們需要
想想清楚，對不起，這是一個技術問題
關於美國政治的術語所以我們真的需要把
詳細提出嚴肅的想法
這就是我們所追求的目的以及我們所追求的兩條具體途徑
現在真正關注的是能源轉型，因為隻有一個
四分之一個世紀，能源係統非常複雜，你必須有動力
電網我們必須將所有車輛轉換為電動或氫或某些
建築部門必須遠離其他非排放源
更高效的工業排放大量溫室氣體 森林砍伐換句話說
實現淨零排放是一項相當複雜的挑戰，需要解決很多問題
移動部件，它是一大筆錢，最多不過是一個能源係統
成本，但能源係統每年花費數萬億美元，因此值得獲得
是的，這是第一個路徑，第二個是土地
使用和海洋使用，因為我們
真的非常接近摧毀一切
不可逆轉的是，當物種消失時，它就永遠不會再來
當生態係統退化時，許多生態係統再也不會回來
如果我們超過了氣候閾值，我們將在下一個世紀度過
災難性的海平麵上升、風暴、熱浪等等災難，所以我們
非常接近，所以這些是我們真正的兩條主要途徑
專注於生物及其相關
與糧食生產和其他農業生產的聯係
對於這個地區來說，這是中心，因為這是一個生物多樣性呃伊甸園，也是
生物多樣性嚴重受到威脅的地區，所有這些美麗和
它正在被拆除，而且發生得如此之快
因為現在經濟非常非常非常大
並要求中國僅僅因為其對熱帶地區的需求就可以砍伐這個國家的森林
硬木沒有問題，除非你小心，所以這些是我們的兩個領域
我真的想重點關注，我想說的最後一點是
這第三類合作恰巧是當你從技術角度審視能源計劃或
在生態係統計劃中，任何國家都無法做到
這本身除了地方一級之外無能為力，但計劃需要
毫無疑問是跨國的
有很多地方行動，但它們必須成為更廣泛行動的一部分
框架，這就是為什麽這是一個人工智能研討會，因為一個計數裏斯不是
隻在地圖上在一起，不僅是物理鄰居，而且還有工作要做
共同努力，因為阿桑國家如果不努力就無法實現其目標
一起，所以我們需要在跨國規劃層麵上做到這一點，這很難
因為沒有民選跨國官員
在任何地方，所有跨國組織都是軟弱的，因為它們都沒有能力
軍隊中沒有人有我們組織的政治領導人
世界上國家級的物質力量
謊言，然而這就是政治普遍存在的地方，但我們有
急需解決的全球和地區問題不是
一次將拯救一個國家，將由中國老撾人民民主共和國拯救
柬埔寨越南合作毫無疑問是沒有辦法的
一次一個國家必須在能源分水嶺完成
馬來西亞的係統絕對需要與其他國家整合
地區和那些地區機構在政治上薄弱
組織上需要大大加強，然後
呃，哪個地區是我們正在處理的問題的正確地區的問題
aan 因為它是一個重要的建立區域實體，但我昨天說過
我再說一遍，我認為對於能源行業來說 ARP 更合適
這還包括阿桑加上中國、日本、韓國、澳大利亞和新西蘭
美國會大發雷霆，我會一氣嗬成
一旦美國對你與中國的合作感到不滿
我強烈建議你與中國密切合作，我的
對澳大利亞的強烈建議是不要與合作建立潛艇基地
中國，我們現在不要在核潛艇上浪費錢，並籌集資金
壓力更大，所以我自己的建議是更廣泛
我希望印度加入這個集團，然後我們就能以一種實際上可以讓世界上很多國家團結起來的方式
解決了問題，很抱歉這麽長時間的漫無目的，但我相信所有的
這些問題是可以解決的 我相信大學有其獨特的和
在這方麵發揮極其重要的作用，因為這就是我們應該做的
開展培訓、教學、教育、研究
政策分析並真正努力製定
政治以應有的方式運作，這是為了共同利益，謝謝
你現在的政治結果不是我們想要的，但我們太愚蠢了
不接受更好的交易 一年前 兩年前 五年前 十年前
現在我們所處的情況是我們無法得到我們所引用的想要的東西
但繼續戰鬥絕對會摧毀甚至
更讓我擔心的是，烏克蘭人的生活真的很糟糕。
隻是被視為一個傷亡者，甚至不值得談論
他們甚至不談論這個，領導絕對是粗俗的，你知道
我看我確信辛寧斯基處境非常艱難，但他所說的一切
現在正在把更多的生命扔進墳墓，坦率地說，沒有策略，沒有
自我意識 沒有情境意識 好吧，這很可悲，因為
美國說服他放棄 2022 年 3 月的和平協議
澤林斯基的機會，他失去了，他缺乏經驗，你知道，當你
美國來告訴你，我們支持你，你知道，如果你沒有經驗，你往往會相信我
我試圖用這種方式告訴他們我你知道我我真的試圖告訴烏克蘭人我是一個老家夥我一直都是
經過很多美國戰爭越南戰爭尼加拉瓜海灣戰爭敘利亞他們
永遠不會贏，你在開玩笑嗎，你真的想像阿富汗那樣結束嗎？他們不相信我，他們隻是想哦
你是普京的辯護者，所以他們不想聽到這些，但我正在告訴他們殘酷的事實
美國的戰爭，他們不想聽，除了俄羅斯，我不確定
烏克蘭實際上是美國政策中的一個大話題，我不確定
你肯定知道這是一個重點
政治階層仍然是軍事工業聯合體和白人
眾議院可能隻是出於政治原因，拜登不想承認
他是個糟糕的撲克玩家，但重點是對美國人民來說
他們已經受夠了，沒有足夠的支持，人們不想要這樣
他們想阻止這件事所以從這個意義上說你是絕對正確的
通常公眾對此沒有太多發言權，我們幾乎沒有公開辯論，但拜登的受歡迎程度確實很高
崩潰了，如果呃對拜登外交政策的不滿非常非常
很清楚，所以也許公眾輿論也會開始發揮作用，因為
我們現在正處於選舉年，我想請你澄清一下
對中國的立場，因為當我觀察共和黨或民主黨時，我會說他們的觀點
對中國的看法非常相似，所以他們實際上對中國抱有非常敵視的看法
中國呃現在有一個峰會呃猿，拜登總統和
欽寧會麵，嗯，你看到緊張局勢有任何減弱嗎？有任何希望嗎？
實際上他們的關係是親的可能不會很友好，但我們可以說至少穩定並且會更少
威脅較小 我會告訴你一件有趣的事情，當習主席來到這次峰會時
在舊金山他會見了 200 位美國商界領袖，他們給了他一個地位
鼓掌 我不認為他們會給美國總統起立鼓掌，但他們給了習主席起立鼓掌
歡呼為什麽中國是他們最大的市場他們都在中國生產
在中國銷售，他們在中國賺了很多錢，他們想要正常的關係
發生的事情有兩件事，一是我們有一種安全級別
美國，呃，都是關於美國的
美國霸權 美國成為第一，這很奇怪
一群人呃，但這是我們的外交政策機構，那麽我們
有些政治家基本上是這麽認為的，而且這是非常特別的
2016年，特朗普通過贏得中期搖擺州贏得大選
美國在美國中西部，這是我們的工業區，他通過以下方式贏得了它
說中國搶走了你的工作，當他在這些領域取得微弱勝利時
民主黨說我們必須攻擊中國才能競爭
政治上與特朗普的關係因此有兩個原因
美國及其政治階層的反華情緒
一個是美國是你所了解的唯一主導國家的想法
知道除非你玩像《風險遊戲》這樣的棋盤遊戲，否則你無法成為世界上的主導國家
當周圍有其他大國時，這又是一個非常時期
誤導了這種保護主義政治，呃試圖吸引一個
美國選舉中很少有搖擺州，其結果是政治
民主黨和共和黨都非常團結地反對中國
根據我的經驗，他們無知，他們不了解中國，他們不了解中國曆史，他們沒有任何觀點
他們玩的是危險的遊戲，就像我們的眾議院議長南希·佩洛西一樣
飛到台灣太愚蠢了抱歉
隻是你為什麽要招惹另一個超級謝謝你這麽說因為
我們有同樣的代表也在這方麵挑釁中國
好吧，不要激怒中國，要尊重，保持正常關係，不要激怒
一個超能力為什麽裏麵有什麽可以戳
超級大國，這是愚蠢的人們應該認為你知道是否有
有些即使你認為存在惡霸，而中國沒有，但如果你認為校園裏有惡霸，
你是一個你認識的小孩，你認為他們是惡霸，去戳他們並說你是惡霸真的很聰明嗎？
你是個惡霸，我恨你，不，你最終會受傷，所以你需要
一些常識，中國甚至沒有欺負中國隻是大成功
動態實際上是歐洲的良好貿易夥伴，所以我們應該正常尊重它，呃美國
焦慮不應該成為歐洲的焦慮，這是另一個領域
歐洲政客隻是重複美國政客的話
你知道我知道在幕後雖然很明顯你知道為什麽
範德蘭幾乎像拜登一樣重複單詞
因為她覺得她的工作就是和美國在一起也許她希望
美國任命她為北約秘書長或其他什麽我不知道是什麽但就是這樣
她所希望的也許就是歐洲犯了這樣的大錯誤
確實在烏克蘭犯了一個大錯誤，試圖與中國為敵也會犯一個大錯誤，這是一個
完全荒謬的失敗提議呃我的最後一個問題因為
我們的時間即將到來，我必須反映您已經提到的一件當前事件，那就是呃選舉
阿根廷 是的，因為我們可以說，當選的總統是不尋常的
個性 嗯你如何看待這種情況 嗯是否有危險
磚頭或者也許對於其他拉丁美洲國家來說他很奇怪
關於外交政策和經濟的建議 是的，當然時間會證明一切
有一件事是他贏得了總統職位，但對國會沒有控製權
他的小政黨，至少目前國會中沒有任何形式的執政聯盟，所以
也許他的呃做事能力需要更廣泛的聯盟
力量，這可能是一個限製，但我首先要說的是，阿根廷是一個
整個曆史上一直不穩定的國家
1820 年代，自從獨立以來，阿根廷就搞亂了更多的貨幣，有更多的貨幣
通貨膨脹和比整個地球上任何其他地方都更加不穩定
這家夥獲勝不是因為他所說的話，而是因為對即將離任的人的厭惡
政府的通脹率達到三位數，超過
當通貨膨脹達到三位數時，你 100% 不可能真正贏得選舉，而我
非常了解阿根廷呃並且實際上與財政部合作過
部長就在這之前，他最終做得很好，他
最終沒有被逼出來他不幸辭職了呃bu這
辭職是因為他自己的腐敗政客
他自己的政黨呃拒絕他試圖推行的正常政策
推動阿根廷現在陷入又一個不穩定的循環
作為一名經濟學家的職業生涯 我一直驚訝地觀察著阿根廷，因為
無論如何，這都不是一個貧窮的國家，而且你知道它是一個巨大的國家
自然財富和非常聰明的人，受過良好教育的人
但它一再造成政治混亂，這可能是又一個
我不想在選舉後的第一天說這個人
他將真正控製他的競選方式，因為有時他們會變得更加
有責任，但也有可能他就是他所說的那樣
呃，阿根廷將麵臨一些真正的麻煩，我不認為是這樣
遺憾的是，因為我是積木的粉絲，我希望看到它們發揮作用
阿根廷是磚頭組的新成員呃不管這家夥是留在還是
從磚塊中出來或被踢出磚塊一切還有待觀察呃但是我呃
我隻希望這家夥把這個作為一個人格麵具而不是一個
真正的政治，因為呃，他真正的政治呃，如果以這種方式表達的話
對阿根廷辦事處非常非常不利
2021 年，他呼籲北約東擴，而不是試圖緩和緊張局勢
美國加大東擴力度 普京強烈回擊
拜登反駁美國在2021年簽署多項聲明，確認北約
會放大 我認為這都是絕對不負責任的俄羅斯蒙麵
向其邊境派兵並將美俄安全草案擺上桌麵
拜登在 2021 年 12 月 17 日在北約不擴大的基礎上達成協議
政府正式回複稱不願意就此進行談判
1 月份的回應中提出問題，然後俄羅斯於 2 月 24 日入侵
2022年明確表示未能就
北約問題是俄羅斯四周後行動的核心
換句話說，紮林斯基宣布烏克蘭接受中立
俄羅斯最初的入侵將烏克蘭帶到了談判桌前
3月下半月，土耳其政府擔任調解人
俄羅斯與烏克蘭達成和平協議，令人難以置信
阻止它是因為美國告訴烏克蘭政府你繼續戰鬥是因為美國決策者
有兩個想法，一是烏克蘭不應該保持中立，而應該成為一個
北約國家和第二，戰爭將通過某種組合來贏得
西方軍備和金融製裁，因此美國加大了製裁力度
戰爭普京說不，我們不會袖手旁觀，我們會戰鬥並動員了數百人
2022 年夏天，成千上萬的俄羅斯人，從那時起，我們就一直走在一條路上
作為一名受到軍事升級威脅的公民，我對這一事實感到不滿
拜登沒有就北約問題進行談判，拜登和普京也沒有談過
據我們所知，自 2022 年 2 月 24 日以來，雙方何時
他們需要談判和談判，但這遭到了強硬派的拒絕
美國紐蘭·林肯·沙利文·拜登說為什麽我們隻是談判
升級，我們將擊敗俄羅斯，在我看來，這是完全魯莽和不負責任的，首先它會導致
烏克蘭的毀滅，其次它有升級為核戰爭的風險，因此
我對此非常不滿，也非常反感主流媒體
就像《紐約時報》一直在重複謊言，說這是一個
2022 年 24 日無端行動似乎希望我們沒有任何
背景或曆史，以了解衝突從何而來以及如何發生
像《紐約時報》這樣的報紙有責任告訴人們
事實是，作為公民，他們並沒有這樣做，我們有權利，你知道
美國國家不關心其本國公民外出進行這些不負責任的戰爭的繁榮
當我們沒有時間處理環境中的其他事情時，我諷刺的是，這一切背後似乎是這樣的
堅持單極世界，堅持主導地位，而美國
希望保持其作為儲備貨幣的地位，似乎在我們也受到的經濟製裁下
甚至可能會加速其他國家貨幣的升值，基本點是美國
占世界人口4.1%怎麽能稱得上世界第一
你知道美國是一個強大的國家，一個富裕的國家，但它不運行
世界，它不應該渴望管理這個世界，這是一種瘋狂
長期以來，美國的意識形態一直是美國應該統治世界
在我看來這令人難以置信，但話又說回來，我職業生涯的大部分時間都是在美國以外的地方度過的
世界上 95.9% 的人，我知道世界上其他 95% 的人不想要
美國統治世界，這並不反對美國，隻是說讓我們擁有自己的世界
不想讓你統治這個世界，我們不想我們的政府是誰，我們是誰，我們如何統治，這不是你決定的
我們自己，你知道你隻是一個地方，而美國領導人不知道
明白他們非常傲慢，他們非常無知，因為有兩大洋，他們非常不了解
世界其他地區的曆史，我們最終得到了這種傲慢和天真的結果
和危險的外交政策，因為毫無疑問美國是富有和強大的，它製造了很多
武器係統，我已經 68 歲了，美國幾乎已經處於戰爭狀態
我生命中的每一年都來自越南、洛杉磯、柬埔寨和尼加拉瓜
阿富汗、伊拉克、敘利亞、利比亞，現在還有烏克蘭，來吧，休息一下，
美國也正在經曆世界其他地方所麵臨的現實
追趕技術確實領先技術以及中國
非常成功、非常勤奮、非常勤奮的社會，在過去 40 年裏
多年來從貧困變成了一個非常重要的世界重要經濟體
美國很難接受美國的態度，如果你聽的話
那些似乎什麽都不知道的國會議員是哦，如果中國成功了，那一定是因為他們在欺騙什麽
因為他們的儲蓄占中國人民GDP的40%以上
致力於教育的顯著升級
每年都會湧現出大量的科學研究項目，這就是
真相，所以這種傲慢不允許真相被揭露，但你提到了一個具體的點
美元的作用是二戰後美國實力的一部分
美國基本上是唯一站立的經濟體，它是世界上技術先進、富裕的大型經濟體
最大的貨幣，而且美元確實是唯一的國際通用貨幣
很長一段時間以來，美元體係成為您進行國際貿易交易的中心
當您購買以美元支付的進口商品時，商品以美元計價
意味著您通常在美國銀行係統中使用美元賬戶
交易是通過所謂的 Swift 銀行間係統完成的，所以美國有一個什麽
法國很久以前就稱其可以印製大量貨幣是一種過高的特權，因為世界其他國家都
使用美元持有美元 美元是世界經濟的基礎
現在這種情況正在改變，改變的原因有三個：一是份額
美國在世界經濟中的地位正在下降，這意味著
美國的主導地位必然會減弱，第二個是技術上的主導地位
除了通過美國銀行和所謂的數字貨幣之外，結算還將以各種方式進行
特別是央行數字貨幣將意味著其他方式進行結算，我們將以人人結算
B 當我們在中國購買或以盧布結算或以盧比結算時貿易
印度等，所以會有多種貨幣，然後是第三部分，這確實是一個糟糕的問題
美國的一係列決策使美元軍事化，這意味著
通常你會很好地考慮錢，你擁有它，你可以使用它，你可以花它，但美國已經開始說，如果
我們不喜歡你，如果你的錢存在我們的銀行裏，你就不一定能再取錢了，所以美國凍結了美元
美國凍結俄羅斯持有的美元 委內瑞拉美國持有的美元
凍結阿富汗的美元持有量我對任何與美國政府不和的政府的建議是
小心你的錢，因為美國可能會介入並凍結你的錢，所以各國都希望持有
他們以其他方式儲備現在完全可以理解，我認為這是此舉的另一部分
從以美元為基礎的國際體係轉向多貨幣國際體係
你提到了儲備貨幣 REM 和 b 的可能性，所以還有其他東西不是
經常報道中國一號，我知道你也寫過這件事，他們正在介入
美國的政策是破壞穩定的，在某些情況下，中國正在中東介入，成為破壞性的政策。
和平使者，如果我們能夠很好地實現和平，那麽代價可能會更小
我想說的是近年來取得的顯著外交成就是中國
在美國促成沙特阿拉伯和伊朗之間的和平協議
認為這兩個國家是不可調和的敵人，他們永遠無法達成共識
美國伊朗是敵人，沙特阿拉伯是盟友，但整個
美國外交政策的理念是，你將國家置於你的管轄之下
像沙特阿拉伯這樣的美國盟友，你在海上與你的敵人作戰
但中方卻有不同的看法，認為沙特和伊朗這樣做沒有根本原因。
存在分歧，但他們有充分的合作理由，因為他們都受到氣候的嚴重打擊
改變他們需要合作，因為水危機相當嚴重，它們都是碳氫化合物經濟體，它們需要一個
能源轉型是非常深刻的，因此中國人推動了
a 兩者之間的和解 我對這次和解感到非常高興
伊朗與沙特之間的苦戰之路
它分裂了西亞，導致也門發生了一場絕對毀滅性的戰爭
美國提供的軍事支持導致大量人員死亡，並穩定了該地區
需要大量的經濟轉型和技術升級和變革
所以這個協議對整個地區來說確實是一個很大的幫助，不僅是對相關兩國和中國
在我看來，由於有智慧看到那是一個
本來可以解決的衝突不僅加劇了，而且美國的做法
即使美國與伊朗達成協議，也總是會推動它
美國政府放棄了名為《聯合全麵行動計劃》的核協議
然後它繼續對伊朗實施製裁，因為美國大多數時候並沒有真正認真地締造和平
這是美國與他們的心態，我發現這非常具有破壞性，而不是在
美國的利益是的，我希望中國保持這種明智的做法
因為台灣現在發生的事情很危險，隻是幫助了解像直通電話那樣的情況
你們之間的代理人戰爭以及中國可能發生的事情台灣的情況就像台灣的情況
烏克蘭非常具有爆炸性，非常危險，需要冷靜的頭腦來避免
衝突事實是，實際上三個政府都讓我
說美國台灣和中國有一個中國和一個中國的政策
無論是台灣政府還是北京政府，他們都說有一個中國，他們不同意
關於1949年發生的事情以及應該如何治理中國，但他們沒有說有兩個國家和美國
各國在與中華人民共和國建交時都明確表示，
一個中國，一個中國政策，那就是如何維護和平，使
確保北京和台北之間的緊張關係不會爆發
但美國卻開始玩弄這個遊戲，並開始與台灣結成軍事同盟。
真正進入軍事聯盟的效果
國家，這是一件極其危險和不謹慎的事情
拜登開始談論我們將如何保衛台灣，而美國政客則談論戰爭是如何發生的
來吧，這一切都是魯莽、不負責任的，我們應該做的是
試圖減少緊張局勢 通過談判化解緊張局勢 通過對話 通過和平
建立想法，而不是煽動某些衝突是不可避免的想法
衝突當然首先對台灣來說是毀滅性的，但
實際上對於全世界來說，所以需要避免這種情況，我們需要冷靜的頭腦，我們不應該有美國人
政客們劍拔弩張，我們不應該讓納粹佩洛西議長飛往台灣
在中國政府一再表示不做、不挑釁、不挑釁之後
衝突本來不必發生，但美國領導層並沒有很好地傾聽
同樣的事情，當普京多次說過不要將北約擴大到
烏克蘭美國哦抱歉我們聽不到你的聲音那是你無話可說那不是你的
生意興隆，然後戰爭來臨，這是非常典型的美國外交政策
因為美國外交政策領導人太傲慢，他們不聽
是的，現在古巴導彈危機已經過去 61 年了，你認為我們吸取了教訓，當然美國永遠不會
接受一個軍事聯盟就在它的家門口，你知道，比如來自加拿大或類似的地方
1960年古巴與蘇聯結盟時，美國的想法就是入侵
就是這樣，它沒有說哦，卡斯特羅先生，你可以做你想做的事，這是一扇敞開的門
如果你想和蘇聯在一起，那對我們來說沒問題，不，它說得好，我們入侵，所以那是1961年和1962年
其影響以及真正魯莽的賭博和魯莽的行動
蘇聯向古巴發射導彈 整個衝突升級為
當時正值核戰爭和古巴導彈危機的邊緣，然後是 1963 年
肯尼迪總統和蘇聯主席尼基塔·庫舍夫都說你知道我們必須從懸崖邊撤退
為了共同生活，我們不應該走到全球核戰爭的邊緣
他們於 1963 年夏天簽署了部分核試驗條約，證明
即使在冷戰最激烈的時候，如果心態正確，你也可以實現和平，這就是我們的心態
現在需要的是，新保守主義思維似乎從未真正消失過
知道隻是幫助我們理解，因為在我看來，你知道烏克蘭對於美國來說並不是不可或缺的，這隻是他關於北約東擴的想法，但幕後還有其他力量在獲利或推動
據我所知，你知道的紮林斯基獲得了 1100 億美元的美國援助
當然，人道主義財政軍事支持也喜歡與黑人的重要合作夥伴關係
Rock Venture Capital 公司高盛將烏克蘭資產私有化，以便
然後會加深國家的債務，所以幫助我們了解一點前進的道路，我們如何擺脫這個困境
好吧，當 20 世紀 90 年代關於智慧或缺乏智慧的辯論最初激烈時，
北約東擴的智慧與我們的承諾背道而馳，也是不明智的，進行了遊說活動
以美國為首的軍事工業聯合體非常簡陋，就是這樣
美國政治作品帶來了大筆資金，所以是羅恩和洛基·巴頓
其他大公司成為說客，然後你知道美國國會議員向金錢致敬
向競選貢獻致敬 他們向遊說者致敬，所以這就是美國政治的運作方式
經濟利益在這裏也發揮著作用，所以我們有意識形態混亂、缺乏曆史的混合體。
感覺傲慢和金錢都在攪動鍋，這與它沒有什麽關係
美國人民，盡管美國人民沒有被問及任何關於烏克蘭資金的投票
幾乎是秘密，因為它們並沒有真正爭論過，它們隻是實施的措施
其他一些立法，這樣你就不必爭論我們已經花費了超過 100 億美元的事實
到目前為止，關於烏克蘭的問題，沒有人真正被問到過。
美國人民還沒有真正被問到，這就是美國政治現在的運作方式，這場戰爭應該做什麽
應該以美國表示北約不會擴大和俄羅斯結束
說我們要把我們的軍隊帶回家，這是這個的核心，可以在
2021 年 12 月發布，2022 年 3 月發布，現在仍然可用
沒有解決許多其他問題 領土發生了什麽 克裏米亞發生了什麽 這些是為了
談判，但基本想法是兩個超級大國退出，戰爭停止，我們去
政治解決方案而不是軍事解決方案，這應該是我們的首要任務，所以最後正如你所想的那樣
關於未來，呃，核戰爭的前景，我們現在所處的世界
留給下一代您希望年輕人知道什麽，保留並記住年輕人應該領導什麽
通往更安全、和平、環境可持續的合作人民之路
公平的世界，這是我們需要建設我們不想感受到的未來的關鍵
陷入暴力和環境破壞的無意識循環
我們麵臨的問題是可以解決的，而不是由需求驅動的
人們被精英的貪婪或權力追求所驅使，我們需要
讓新一代人說這行不通，我們想要一個和平的世界
共同繁榮，解決環境危機
已經變得如此深刻並且被忽視，部分原因是我們在浪費時間
我們的資源都花在這些無用的戰爭上，不讓我說這是第一本書
西方政治學的理論是更好的說法，因為柏拉圖在一代人的時間裏寫下了《理想國》
較早，但這是第一本與他的作品配對的政治學書籍
尼科馬基倫理學和兩個加入的倫理學
因為對於亞裏士多德來說，倫理學和政治學是
當然15 14也是一樣，我認為是這樣
馬卡維利寫了一本非常不同的政治學，他寫了一本手冊
對於王子來說，這是關於如何維持
西方的權力和政治學開始成為維護權力的科學。
或管理權力不是生產善的科學，事實上馬卡維利正在教導
王子實際上正在向米底人提出工作申請，因為他已被米底人解雇了
他想要一份工作，他正在為米底人提供如何保住權力的建議
《佛羅倫薩》後來在《下一世紀》中成為西方最有影響力的文本之一
文化史的作者是托馬斯·霍布斯
《利維坦》寫於 1640 年，當時西方科學正在形成，
霍布斯想要一種關於人類的科學理論
但建模為相互碰撞的單個原子，因為對於霍布斯來說
不再是德行的培養，而是每個人的道德修養
貪得無厭所以霍布斯的人性模型
是它隻是無限的欲望，無法被教導去節製
欲望是不能培養美德的
個人主義，它是貪得無厭的，所以滾刀說，除非有
他說，這是一種壓倒性的力量，人們會互相殘殺，所以我們需要一個利維坦
為了阻止人性不斷犯下暴力
對人性非常悲觀的看法，但請注意，要點不再是
是否有任何被認為不可能的培養美德的想法
需要機構來反思殘酷的現實
這是哲學的翻轉，不再是培養善行
關於控製不好的事情
有趣且重要的是這是
在 18 世紀初首先被一個非常呃
有影響力的公共知識分子伯納德·曼達維爾
在倫敦寫了一篇名為《蜜蜂寓言》的文章，在《蜜蜂寓言》中
最有攻擊性的蜜蜂獲勝，但它們使蜂巢變得強大
太棒了，如果你試圖控製貪婪、惡習或攻擊性
蜂巢中的蜜蜂實際上會死亡，所以這現在是一種哲學
帝國認為權力追求是好的，因為它會讓社會變得更好
強大、富有並且能夠支配他人
所以它采用了霍布斯並添加了另一個元素
蜂巢統治他人，顯然這是一種吸引新興英國人的哲學
六十年後，亞當·斯密出現了帝國。
第1776章 1776
人性是個人主義的品味
無限的欲望是巨大的動力，但市場力量會馴服
所有這一切都是因為市場力量將迫使一種競爭
從而造福社會
結果重點是盎格魯撒克遜哲學擺脫了1800多個
多年的西方傳統 西方傳統
亞裏士多德和基督教是共同利益的傳統
隨著英國的崛起，美德和對窮人的關懷
帝國哲學的出現變成了權力的好處
哲學，甚至是這樣的想法：這會導致引用常見的觀點
很好，但還有兩個重要步驟可以說明窮人已成為
敵人，因為現在他們是社會的拖累，所以約翰·洛克是我們最重要的人之一
受人尊敬的哲學家希望窮人受到非常嚴厲的對待，這樣他們
不會成為社會的負擔然後
馬魯斯 托馬斯·馬魯斯在亞當·斯密之後的一代人之後寫道
1798 年，他提出了一些更黑暗的建議，那就是那些蜂巢
不同的社會實際上是在相互競爭生存
因為生產的人口數量超出了能夠供養的人口數量，所以生活就是一場爭奪戰
生存和幫助窮人的努力不可避免地會失敗，因為
成為更多的窮人，這是他的鐵律
人口及其引領下一個
達爾文從科學的角度出色地繼承了這個想法
理解自然選擇的觀點，但19世紀後期
哲學家們把這個想法看作是一場跨界鬥爭
各個國家，現在各個國家、人民或種族都在為之奮鬥
生存，這被稱為社會達爾文主義，這個想法不僅是
如果你沒有仁慈地幫助自己的窮人，那麽與其他社會相比，你就會削弱你的社會，事實上
你正在為生存而奮鬥，這導致了最糟糕的情況
曆史罪行，因為納粹主義實際上是
它是建立在社會基礎上的哲學
達爾文主義的偽科學和德國人民會的這種想法
生存下去，或者斯拉夫人民將會生存，所以這甚至是一場戰爭
現在消滅這種想法導致了最壞的結果
殘酷，但我們仍然處於西方世界的心態中
競爭和鬥爭才是
當我學習經濟學時，我是社會的絕對基礎
教我如何完美競爭 我從來沒有被教過，哪怕一分鍾
完美的合作這個想法甚至不存在
據我所知，經濟學甚至沒有在一篇論文中對此進行過闡述，因為合作的理念是
規範不存在
發生了讓貪婪激勵的想法
行動也許確實產生了創新精神
在某種程度上，但事實就是如此
擁護和教導當然會導致最糟糕的結果
過度行為使世界變得富有，而那些富有的人變得一貧如洗
充滿仁慈和同情心，也是一位糟糕的作家
美國的aan變得相當流行
蘭德是一種在年輕人中流行的哲學劇
人們和許多政治家寫了一篇著名的文章
自私的美德因此自私成為
美德實際上就是一篇文章的字麵標題，令人難以置信，她是
這些小說仍然受到許多人的擁護，讀起來令人難以忍受，但它們是一部分
我們的理念所以我說得太長了我知道因為五分鍾前標誌告訴我停下來
但這對我來說不太仁慈，但讓我說
接下來我相信我們已經偏離了西方的正確道路
文明有西方文化的根源，我們可以真正利用它們來尋找
美德之路和政治之路
道德的，但盎格魯撒克遜版本深深地失去了這一點
傳統，這有很多令人著迷的原因，但主要是
大英帝國實力的崛起在很多方麵都是
極其惡劣的帝國和美國學到了
它從大英帝國那裏知道的一切，因為它的目標是成為
二戰後大英帝國的延續，這就是需要終結一個世界
可以回歸共同的道德原則
現在讓我總結一下，我希望這能夠
確實發生了，我認為你們在座需要幫助領導這件事，我們需要
幫助解釋這些事情以及何時
習近平主席去年發起了全球文明倡議
認為這實際上是一個非常積極的重要開端
因為中國說過我們應該回到我們的文化根源來尋找出路
我非常讚同的轉發以及 GCI 或全球文明倡議
是一次跨越文明智慧的邀請，我在雅典主持了一次會議
上個月與雅典學院聯合舉辦亞裏士多德孔子研討會
探討古代智慧應對現代挑戰的方法，將中國和
西方哲學家，除了一位非常有名的佛陀之外，我們並沒有正確地把佛陀放在餐桌上。
來自柬埔寨的傑出佛教思想家，但我們需要更多這樣的人
這次會議結束時，我們同意舉行第二次會議
這次的座談會我希望是亞裏士多德佛孔子座談會
7月我在山東省舒呃
希望我們能一起參與，呃我們會回來那麽多
哲學家們感興趣的是我下個月將在 shuu 呃
尼山呃論壇裏麵呃也是一個
哲學論壇，但山東省政府要求主辦
亞裏士多德佛孔子座談會和我的後續會議
相信東方的這種理念
西方深層哲學傳統尋找共同的深層人性
跨越它們是極其重要和強大的，並且真的可以
有助於達成目前尚不存在的理解，我認為
如果我認為這種理解的缺陷絕大多數是在西方方麵
可能會這麽說，因為我們沉浸在競爭甚至戰爭的哲學中
這種心態被認為是理所當然的，但它實際上是最近出現的現象
這是一種帝國現象，需要被擱置，所以我相信這
實際上可以做到，我可以再多兩個嗎
分鍾，因為我想談談 2050 年淨零排放，首先要表達我是多麽欽佩
肖博士提出的建議和我是這本書的英文版或中文版
中文 英文 好吧，如果可以的話，我們得給我一份英文翻譯
但我也非常渴望閱讀您即將發表的論文，讓我添加一些內容
我認為是核心的東西，但我認為它們已經完全在你的呃
氣候俱樂部的想法是不可能的
一次一個國家實現淨零排放
最重要的是，對於一個島嶼來說，我們需要互聯的能源
係統按地區劃分，因為如果您正在利用可再生能源，
間歇性，所以這裏是晴天或這裏有風，這需要
互聯互通和東亞應在共同網格中互聯
中國大陸有一個節目叫導遊
中國國家合作組織
正在進行分析工作的網格工程師
互連非洲、南美洲、北美的區域電網
美國對於歐洲和亞洲來說是
非常重要的工作 台灣應該與
大陸在一個電網中，大陸應該和蒙古連接，應該連接
與阿桑國家
並與子
係統它將[音樂]成為該地區的經濟動力源
世界而不是戰場，因為這個地區有
如果它一起工作，它就會失去一切，如果它一起工作，它可能會失去一切
它將該地區視為戰場 我想這裏的每個人
地區可以理解這一點，唯一不理解的是我
實際上是國家，但需要告訴美國
我們解決我們的問題，我們知道如何
討論不要幹涉，因為你會弄得一團糟
這實際上是關於日本的事實
這是零碳能源和所有的合作
會
區域合作、區域結構和
以及可能顯示的路線圖
物理互連 哪些技術
我去過哪裏
與計劃相反的是 80% 是化石燃料 那是什麽計劃
沒什麽，請不要鼓勵
他們如此
顯示 ptic 或工作 我是索尼，我剛剛在
幾天前在北京，我們將回來參加他們將於 9 月 26 日舉辦的會議，呃
關於能源互聯的全球會議 我認為這確實是呃呃 AB 絕對是核心
所以我同意你所說的一切，我認為這絕對是正確的方式
向前，在那個多中心世界裏有一個概念
我發現這非常有用，這是一個由
歐盟實際上是一個始於羅馬天主教的概念
教會，這就是我們需要的輔助性概念
各級治理，因此我們需要全球治理
區域治理 國家治理 地方治理 你把每個問題都放在
盡可能最低的級別，最接近可以解決問題但無法解決的人
低於可以解決的水平，因此電網無法必須在國家層麵解決
在區域層麵解決脫碳目標
必須在全球層麵上解決，等等，輔助性的想法是
我們有多個層麵 我們有全球治理 我們有全球治理
政府可以做某些事情，但不能做其他事情
政府 我們有國家政府 我們有

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