風蕭蕭_Frank
以文會友
YouTube
中國人工作就是比別人勤勞?! 美國官員自以為瞭解中國 中國的巨大優勢是?!【國際360】20240808?@全球大視野Global_Vision?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_0dejUKFEI
今天我們很高興彼得先生能加入我們，就很多問題進行交談和對話，所以現在讓我給彼得機會介紹一下他的工作經曆和背景，讓我先從我對中國的興趣開始，大概 40 年來我一直很感興趣，所以我研究了很多我喜歡的人的傳記，比如作曲家、作家等等，所以我對東方和西方有了更好的理解，我認為西方的哲學和宗教是我所說的二元論，所以它們天生就是評判性的，所以你有好壞天堂地獄等等，這主要受到基督教的影響，是的，非常受猶太教和基督教信仰的影響，好吧，我發現這非常有吸引力，我不喜歡人們總是尋找贏家和輸家的想法，所以當我開始研究東方宗教時，我從佛教和印度教開始，好吧，我非常喜歡這個想法和諧與平衡，所以我隻是說我基本上是一個西方人，一個東方人。當我 60 歲時，我告訴我的助手，我想每 6 到 8 周去中國一次，待一個星期，那是什麽時候開始的，呃，大概是 15 年前開始的，好吧，但我去過中國 80 多次，因為我在 Mckenzie 的專業是保險，所以我為世界各地的大型保險公司提供谘詢，所以大約在 2000 年初，那是你第一次去中國，是的，第一次旅行，我之前也去過一些地方，那時中國隻有自行車，沒有汽車，哦，在 80 年代，是的，在 80 年代和 90 年代初，但這是我第一次真正花時間在中國，我最終寫了一本書，因為我厭倦了在西方媒體上閱讀關於壓迫腐敗的政府和不快樂的被壓迫人民的報道，好吧，我對自己說，我已經去過中國 80 多次，為什麽我從來沒有見過這些不快樂的被壓迫人民，好吧，但是你去過城市和農村，但我想大概 75% 會去大城市，大城市，好吧，其他大部分時間，我和家人、孩子們在這裏玩得很開心，嗯，是的，但是我對中國的整體感覺很好，所以我寫了一本書，主要探討了美國和中國之間的真正差異，因為美國總是說我們的模式是唯一正確的模式，最終每個人都會成為一個民主國家，順便說一句，我根本不相信這一點，所以美國是一個個人主義模式，可以追溯到逃離歐洲，中國是一個集體模式，嗯，我們有一個相對不喜歡聽到這些話的政府，從設計上來說，政府相對較弱，所以當開國元勳們開始製定美國憲法時，他們基本上說，讓我們盡一切努力將政府被允許做的事情降到最低，因為這應該是一個由人民擁有和為人民服務的國家，嗯，另一方麵，中國有一個非常強大的中央政府，可以追溯到幾千年前我一直認為，部分原因是人們需要團結起來，防止北方的逃兵，還有許多災難，天氣災難，需要人們團結起來進行重建，所以這個模型非常類似，美國有一條天然的國家邊界，比中國安全得多，是的，我們沒有同等的，我的意思是，當定居者抵達美國時，這個國家基本上是由印度人擁有的，他們在美國相對不成熟，基本上不是很好，但美國總統似乎在緊急情況下也擁有很大的權力，國會也可以製定新的法律來推翻舊的法律，是的，你知道，在緊急情況下，也許這使得美國在處理危機時相當靈活，在和平時期，政府可能會盡量減少規模，是的，但有一個非常顯著的區別，那就是美國最優秀、最聰明的年輕人幾乎總是從商，而不是從政，他們和醫療領域，因為那是你賺最多錢??的地方，賺很多錢，賺很多錢，沒錯，最優秀和最聰明的人，回到中國的官話傳統，通常會進入公共服務和政府，對吧，但淨效應是，你知道，如果我想想我在中國政府遇到的人，他們受過高等教育，他們往往很世故，在不同的行業工作過，但你怎麽比較這種美國製度和歐洲國家？因為你知道整個過程我們稱之為現代文明，無論是科學革命還是工業革命，它們實際上都是在歐洲開始的，但歐洲國家的政治製度與美國有何不同，或者它們相似，它們相似之處在於它們都是民主國家，所以你依靠選票來選擇你的領導人但是民主出現得晚得多，從 18 世紀到 19 世紀，沒有一個歐洲國家是民主黨，沒有一個是民主的，是的，大多數是的，但是，歐洲也有根深蒂固的階級製度，而美國從一開始就沒有階級製度，我的意思是，目的是為每個人提供平等的機會，因為他們正在逃離歐洲，而歐洲是一個階級製度，嗯，但我認為經濟的發展方式相當相似，我認為美國的不同之處在於，美國非常依賴移民來創造，所以很多偉大的發明發現都來自美國，可以追溯到歐洲人，他們經常移民到美國，因為他們想逃避壓迫，從中國人的角度來看，當我和很多中國人交談時，無論他們來自不同的背景，當他們談論美國時，他們似乎有一個更大的畫麵，他們談論西方，他們知道西方的崛起始於歐洲，因此他們喜歡
比較歐洲和中國之間的主要差異是什麽，然後
從那裏開始，他們嚐試
然後他們接下來會轉向我們和中國之間的主要差異是什麽，是的，因此我必須從你的角度來看，如果你比較歐洲和中國，比較歐洲和美國，你知道主要差異是什麽
無論是政治製度還是機構或其他背景，你看我們和中國之間的對比似乎更加引人注目
是的，但是如果你比較歐洲和中國，特別是在 16、17、18、19 世紀，當歐洲崛起時，差異可能不同或不同類型的差異，你會如何看待
我的意思是，顯然在 19 世紀鴉片戰爭之前，歐洲人和中國之間並沒有那麽多的互動，我認為
尤其是英國，它在某種程度上占據了主導地位，我認為這造成了中國和歐洲人之間的高度緊張，我認為美國人在鴉片戰爭中發揮了作用，但那不是一個戲劇性的角色，我認為呃我會說美國，歐洲人總體上也更具侵略性，他們似乎
他們的政府擁有更集中的權力，是的，以促進工業化，對吧，這就是為什麽
第一次世界大戰和第二次世界大戰發生在那些歐洲國家之間，我認為我的意思是，對我來說，19 世紀發生的主要事情是中國錯過了工業革命，這非常有趣，所以
所以清朝是由馬努斯統治的，坦率地說，你有例子
比如皇後石室把國庫花在重建頤和園上
而不是海軍，這是海軍的本意，所以我認為馬努斯在昌朝統治下的內向性導致對世界其他地方發生的事情缺乏興趣，沒有任何真正的求知欲，所以當你第一次看到英國人
這裏是我們所有的發現，這就是我們能夠現代化的回應，當時的 EMP 或皇帝
我們沒有什麽可學的我認為當時的中國對歐洲的情況一無所知，或者說知之甚少，否則你會認為他們的行為可能會有所不同，是的，絕對如此，所以如果你回顧中國的曆史，如果你錯過了工業革命，它確實影響了大多數發達的西方國家，而美國和英國可能發揮了重要作用，這也是為什麽你知道曆史學家經常談論德國曾經是一個落後地區或國家，你知道甚至沒有統一，直到 19 世紀下半葉末，德國才開始成為一個強國，是的，那麽德國怎麽能做到這一點，而其他歐洲國家，比如波蘭，我不知道，卻沒有做到這一點，是的，在亞洲，日本也取得了成功，但人們也在談論日本如何成功掌握工業化進程，而中國卻一直落後，如果你以這兩個例子為例，我的意思是，它們的共同點是德國和日本呃，出於軍事原因，他們非常渴望建立自己的工業實力，所以中國，我的意思是日本在軍事上非常積極，俄羅斯呃和其他地區，所以我認為一旦你開始走這條路，那麽你就會想要建造船隻，想要建立一支軍隊，想要建造一切與軍事實力相關的東西，德國也完全一樣，德國顯然是 19 世紀末歐洲戰爭中非常重要的參與者，然後在第一次世界大戰和第二次世界大戰中非常積極和活躍，所以我認為在這兩種情況下，工業化都伴隨著軍事旋轉，你知道戰爭創造了資本主義所以資本主義是在歐洲興起的，而不是在
亞洲，因為他們一直處於戰爭狀態，而這些戰爭創造了對
不同類型的組織、不同類型的融資的需求，顯然
創造了鼓勵商業的需要，因為商業會給你錢來資助戰爭，因此所謂的
軍國主義國家工業化方式實際上出現得更早，比如從文藝複興時期開始，意大利城邦，比如威尼斯，它們本質上是軍國主義的
國家，一方麵他們需要商業，另一方麵他們需要強大的軍隊或軍事力量，所以後來
呃，後來的呃呃，像德國和日本，他們需要做更多，否則
他們將無法擠進成為一個強國，所以所有的歐洲大國，比如法國，你知道路易十四和其他利奧尼亞，他們所以所有的歐洲大國都有這種軍國主義工業化的特征，所以也許這是中國憤怒的另一種解釋，他們從來沒有想過或不想走那條路，我認為 chin
dasty 也許有另一個原因，因為他們就像你提到的少數民族
控製主要勢力，你知道，即使是像威尼斯這樣的城市國家，如果他們想崛起，他們也需要每個人都能夠戰鬥，每個人都能夠做生意，是的，但是如果中國政府這樣做，這意味著所有的財政資源和軍事力量都將轉移到那些會造成威脅的人手中，所以也許這是他們不走那條路的另一個原因，而對於日本來說，一旦他們有了天皇，他們就是每個人的神，似乎這個問題至少可以解決，我不知道，所以這是一個觀點，是的，當然，我們現在變得非常不同，因為我們不依賴 M，你知道他們沒有更多的國王王後，但後來的美國也像今天一樣，你看看美國這個軍事呃綜合工業綜合體，m 類似於那種傳統，是的，非常強大，所以發展中的人們認為這似乎是任何國家實現工業化的必要因素之一，你需要它來創造巨大的激勵和對重工業的需求是的，對許多其他事情的需求以及對技術采用的需求，否則您將被擊敗，是的，被殺死，所以那是一種觀點，當然，美國有很多不同的特點，比如他們盡量縮小政府規模，但對於歐洲人來說這是不可能的，如果你這樣做，也許你將成為下一個被摧毀的國家，是的，你如何看待這種觀點，這本質上是布拉爾和斯巴特的觀點，你知道戰爭創造了資本主義，所以人們說為什麽資本主義從未在東方興起，呃在亞洲，呃，這提供了一種解釋，當然，根據馬克斯·韋伯的觀點，他有不同的觀點，他的宗教信仰是不同的基督教徒，他們更注重工業，他們喜歡拯救，但這種觀點似乎與曆史不太一致，因為猶太人也非常像中國人或佛教徒，也許他們都擅長做我不知道是的呃那些事情，但他們無法崛起，也許是因為缺乏集中軍事主義是的，工業化
動機，你稱之為國家意誌，利用這種意誌來動員資源，以不同的方式組織國家，與歐洲國家競爭，是的，但美國能夠做到這一點，呃，也許不是一開始，但美國知道這一點，他們知道歐洲人的行為方式，所以美國後來也建立了軍隊，也通過內戰進一步增強了美國的軍事能力，以便很好地發揮作用，所以中國當中國變得有點心態，我們確實需要一支國家軍隊進行軍事化，那是在內戰和抗日戰爭期間，這幫助中國人最終組織軍事，MH 進行戰鬥，憑借這種軍事呃戰鬥力，你進入了社會計劃時代，但在社會計劃時代，雖然你有強大的軍事思維，但你不允許市場繁榮，所以你錯過了一部分，安達解決了這個問題，他不僅繼承了這種軍事機構能力，還允許市場，而中國可能隻有市場，但知道這種缺乏，我認為有美國和歐洲之間的兩個根本區別
歐洲一直是一個非常分裂的大陸
所以你們有語言差異，有文化差異，有宗教差異，還有
19 世紀戰爭幾乎一直持續，我的意思是
直到第一次世界大戰，然後在第二次世界大戰中爆發，所以我認為
分裂，盡管他們試圖通過創建歐盟在一定程度上解決這個問題，但主要國家之間仍然存在相當大的差異，這是一個擁抱美國和中國的優勢在於基本上擁有一個單一語言的大型一體化國家，嗯，美國還有一個額外的優勢，那就是雖然它參與了戰爭，但戰爭從來不發生在自己的土地上，所以我認為美國經濟成功的原因之一是他們能夠避免戰爭，而不是選擇性地加入戰爭，就像他們在第一次世界大戰和第一次世界大戰中所做的那樣，對吧，然後是中國，同樣的事情，我的意思是中國麵臨的挑戰是軍閥的內部鬥爭和內戰，但是一旦被鄧小平統治，中國就變得非常注重市場驅動的經濟和消費主義，鄧小平在短時間內就做得非常出色，所以這很有趣，所以你知道東歐國家也進行了市場改革，他們的經濟基礎要優越得多，你知道他們每個人都有一個社會計劃，他們建立了許多工業，包括礦業工業，為什麽 AFA 會引入市場改革，他們無法像中國那樣表現良好，所以你提到了鄧小平領導層和東歐國家領導層之間的主要區別是什麽，他們在哪裏從某種意義上說，他們錯了，他們有更好的市場改革基礎，他們沒有經曆文化革命，所以你對此有什麽看法，是的，我認為中國一直擁有的巨大優勢就是規模，好吧，所以當你擁有今天的 14 億消費者人口時，即使你看看亞洲四小龍，當你看看香港、新加坡、台灣和韓國時，他們也無法創造任何接近中國創造的經濟足跡，部分原因是這個國家的規模，中國的人口，是的，所以規模經濟非常重要，這也可以解釋美國與歐洲國家相比的成功，我們的規模要大得多，所以即使德國工程師可能非常優秀，日本工程師可能非常優秀，但你的經濟規模非常有限，是的，所以另一方麵，嗯，較小的國家也可能有一些優勢，例如，你知道你需要發展經濟，你需要大規模生產，你需要全球市場，但新加坡的規模可能很大他們隻需要一小部分全球市場
就能支持他們的工業化，而中國需要整個地球，地球的資源非常有限，因此
也可能使較小的國家更容易在
創建全球市場方麵進行
是的，你知道，我聽說在新加坡 60 年代、50 年代和 70 年代的工業化過程中，他們擁有龐大的製造業部門，但僅憑這個市場
就能夠支持許多人的就業，對於中國來說，你不能隻依賴這一點，是的，你需要依賴
也許其他更大的市場，例如紡織品，但全球的紡織品市場非常有限，美國給中國一些配額，就是這樣，我從台灣經濟學家那裏聽說，他們說我們給了他們 Coda，很快
coda 就滿了，然後他們不得不尋找替代市場，幸運的是，中國打開了改革的大門，因此中國成為台灣最大的全球市場，以吸收他們的
工業產出，因此從這個角度來看，中國更難現在全球市場在哪裏
美國也在試圖縮小中國的全球市場，這可能會讓你覺得這會讓中國的工業化進程更難完成。首先，我認為遏製中國的想法是一個荒謬的想法，因為如果你看看中國的經濟勢頭，如果你看看文化優勢，中國人就是比美國人更努力，而且不可否認，歐洲人也持同樣的觀點，他們說美國人比歐洲人更努力。歐洲人，哦，不，絕對的，我的意思是看看歐洲，我的意思是罷工的次數，嗯，呃呃，假期的次數，我的意思是當我們麥肯錫從法國和西班牙雇傭美國員工時，我的意思是他們隻是習慣了一種要求低得多的模式，而中國的員工又要努力得多，所以在麥肯錫工作過，在我們許多美國辦事處工作過，然後在中國也是一樣，這是非常不同的，如何不同，首先，如果你去問大多數美國人，說你是每周工作六天而不是五天，你要從早上 9 點工作到晚上 9 點，呃，他們會說你瘋了，我的意思是，但這隻是不會被接受的，在美國是這樣的，對吧，但在 19 世紀，也許美國人的平均工作量和中國人一樣努力，他們每天工作 6 天甚至 7 天，也許，也許在戰爭時期等困難時期，但嗯，我想我的意思是，如果我想想我父親，他在 20 年代、30 年代和 40 年代長大，他的工作時間與今天在美國工作的人沒有什麽不同，好吧，好吧，當我在 M 的北京或上海辦事處工作時呃，如果你觀察的話，你會看到深夜燈亮著，然後你會看到人們在白天在辦公桌前睡著了，因為他們基本上沒有睡覺，也許後來有一種模式，你必須比早些的人更努力，是的，所以你我們美國人比歐洲人更努力，中國人必須比美國更努力才能崛起，否則就不可能，所以就像德國和日本一樣，他們需要成為更加軍國主義的國家，否則他們就沒有機會崛起，因為國家已經完全被占領了，就像你知道在學術界，你知道在美國，這對所有教授來說都是很正常的，他們呆在辦公室直到晚上 8 點 9 點，有時甚至是午夜，但我去歐洲旅行，如果你這樣做，其他人會看不起你，為什麽你需要這麽努力工作，當然，所以大約五點或四點，每個人都鎖上別人的門，說我們回家吧，是的，呃，但是呃你
確切地說，我們在工業化方麵是一個後來者，也許這可以解釋為什麽我們在其他方麵表現不同，但
與我們相比，中國甚至更晚，這也許可以解釋一下
但在未來，一旦中國富裕起來，你會看到印度人走路更賣力，中國人
開始放鬆，他們想在四點左右下車，他們隻想工作
你知道，一周 3 天或 5 天，是的，我會說中國人比
印度人工作更聰明，所以我給你舉個例子，我當時正在德裏
我和家人一起去北部的拉賈斯坦邦，我們在這條美麗的六車道高速公路上，從德裏出來，六車道高速公路非常好
每個方向都很好，但大約 50 英裏後它變成了一條土路，哦，好吧，我說，好吧，發生了什麽事，哦，新市長，哦，不支持拉賈斯坦邦，不尊重他們
所做的，所以他隻是阻止了這條路，好吧，所以我稱之為經濟印度的非理性非常嚴重，這是非常嚴重的，所以即使印度人民非常聰明，他們培養出
更多高端學生，我們在麥肯齊學院看到的，幾乎比其他任何國家都多，但印度沒有像中國那樣的體製，中國有大量受過高等教育的人，他們在黨內是精英階層，他們都站在同一戰線上，我的意思是讓所有印度人，我的意思是從穆斯林和印度教徒開始，他們不是一個統一的國家，對吧，我認為美國 150 年來一直是世界頂級經濟體，我認為美國對其他國家在做什麽幾乎沒有什麽好奇心，因為他們已經習慣了我們是第一的想法，他們反對中國成功的一個原因是，這是一種有贏家和輸家的二元思維模式，所以美國人真的相信，如果中國非常成功，他們就會贏，我們就會輸，是的，如果你向中國人解釋這一點，他們會說為什麽你看看，為什麽不
你隻是說我們不想雙方都贏嗎如果你隻是想想我們的政府，聽政府的人談論中國，他們對中國一無所知，他們知道，我說，我很好，我說，拜登政府，甚至特朗普政府，他們有很多人似乎非常了解中國，所以他們可以設計出很好的政策來遏製中國，讓我們可以說他們非常有信心，我會說他們對中國的了解過於自信，好吧，我想如果你問他們告訴我關於儒家思想的事情，他們會說，哦，我們都知道，儒家學院被放在美國是為了監視，當你說不，我在談論儒家價值觀時，你不會發現超過 5% 的美國人可以解釋任何關於儒家思想的事情，我在北京大學，他們說，皮特，我們有一個由 16 名國會議員組成的代表團，所有人都非常關注中國，其中 16 人對中國持消極態度去過中國三次，一個去過中國一次，14 個從未去過中國，我不知道，好吧，差不多，但仍然是一個非常小的數目，對吧，當你聽國會議員對中國的態度非常激進，總是解釋中國及其運作方式時，他們經常會說，中國不可避免地會成為一個民主國家，因為中國人民非常不高興，你說你有什麽證據，他們實際上沒有任何證據，因為他們從未去過，你怎麽解釋，也許另一方麵，這可能是自然的，因為我相信那些國會議員大部分都去過歐洲，甚至日本，但中國最近才成為發展中國家，你知道，發展中，所以他們沒有機會，誰想去一個落後的欠發達國家，對吧，沒有動機你去，你知道，當中國剛剛崛起時，他們可能還沒有機會，我的意思是，我隻是看到這是基於 150 年的領先地位而產生的過度自信 150 年，好吧，我的意思是這可以追溯到 19 世紀後期，當時工業革命真正獲得了蒸汽，嗯嗯，美國談到了盜竊知識產權，這在 19 世紀是一件獨特的事情，美國在華盛頓有一個龐大的部門，其唯一的工作就是從英國人那裏竊取知識產權，是的，所以這種情況已經持續了很多年，是的，實際上，同樣的英國人，當他們崛起時，他們花費了大量精力從意大利竊取技術，是的，你知道，它仍然來自阿拉伯人，所以這這這這一直在永遠，沒錯，但後來你成為了一個創新者，從那時起，他們開始認為你知道你一直是創新者，我們是第一，這是真的，但我的意思是中國是創新的，但以不同的方式，中國更多地是應用驅動，所以當 iPhone 問世時像 iPhone 和互聯網，以及我所說的偉大的經濟理念，它們往往來自美國，但是如果你看看應用程序的實際發展，是的，所以如果你拿 iPhone 來看中國所有圍繞 iPhone 建立的企業，它非常令人印象深刻，規模巨大，但實際上對美國來說也是如此，正如你提到的，在 19 世紀，美國是歐洲的學生，是的，他們學習的所有技術都是複製的，甚至偷竊，但你知道，通過這個過程，你後來會成為頂尖的，也許中國還處於早期美國的階段，主要是學習和模仿，但後來中國會成為頂尖的創新者，因為你已經開始看到科學，很多人是對的，也許這對印度來說是一個自然的過程，有一天可能會和現在一樣，也許印度現在或未來幾十年仍然是學習複製的優秀學生，但最終他們可能會成為頂尖的創新者，我記住，在 19 世紀，如果你在百科全書中搜索一位著名的美國科學家從事純科學研究，你會發現沒有，但到了 19 世紀，到 19 世紀末，美國在工業化、電子商務和應用方麵已經處於領先地位，但在純科學研究方麵卻一無所獲。但進入 20 世紀後，我們便處於領先地位，在早期，我們實際上依靠來自歐洲的移民，因為他們經曆了兩次戰爭，是的，但後來我們開始擁有自己的非常著名和非常有創新精神的科學家，越來越多的非美國人，你再也看不到歐洲人的名字了，也許這隻是一個自然的過程，所以現在你仍然看到中國非常擅長學習、模仿，但你永遠不知道，也許 20 年後，中國也可能會開始非常創新，不僅是技術，而且在基礎研究方麵也是如此，是的，政府現在正在向大學投入資金，大學正在改革他們的教育方式，所以這可能是一個自然的模式，但可能不會一直如此，因為我最終無法走向前沿，但在很多方麵，中國已經在那裏了，我的意思是，如果你看看武威，武威是全球技術和電信領域的領導者，擁有 5G，這是非常令人印象深刻的，如果你看看中國在電動汽車領域所做的，對吧，以及他們在高鐵領域所做的，對吧，所以我認為中國在很多領域都超越了世界其他國家，你認為美國現在的政策實際上是在推動或鼓勵中國人成為芯片 IND 的創新者，否則他們為什麽會有動力購買我們的芯片要便宜得多，而且質量高，價格低，你自己做，現在你說你自己做，我們賣給你，這可能會把中國推到那裏，這就是你想變得合理獨立的原因，因為你不能指望全球化，嗯，我個人認為，遏製中國的運動曆史將回顧這是一個非常愚蠢的想法，因為你正在做的是你真正鼓勵中國翻番減少在美國有優勢領域的投資，如果你推動全球化或經濟發展，你會發現，一旦中國人真正獨立於美國，他們就會有長久的記憶，他們不會回到美國說好吧，現在讓我們做朋友吧，他們會說你支持我們，現在我們匹配了你，我們要走自己的路，這將是洛杉磯。
hi today we're very happy to have uh Mr Peter walk to to join us to have a
conversation and dialogue about lot of issues and uh so now let me uh give uh
Peter the chance to introduce uh himself about his work experience and his
background let me just start with my uh interest in China which has been pretty high for probably 40 years so I studied biographies of a lot of my favorite people so composers authors Etc so I got to develop a better understanding of the East versus the Wes I think Western philosophies and religions are what I would call dualistic by
Nature so they're inherently judgmental so you have good bad Heaven hell Etc is
that mostly influenced by this Christianity yes very influenced by judeo Jewish and Christian faith okay and I just in find that very appealing I don't like the idea that people are constantly looking for winners and losers and uh so when I started the
Eastern religions and I started with Buddhism and Hinduism okay I like very much the idea of Harmony and balance so I just said I'm just basically an easterner in a western body when I hit 60 I told my assistant I wanted to go to China every 6 to8 weeks for a week so when was that which uh that started probably 15 years ago okay but I made over 80 trips to China because my field at in at Mckenzie was insurance so I was advising large insurance companies around the world so around the early 2000 so that was your first trip to China yeah first trips well I did some earlier trips when China was all bicycles no cars oh in the ' 80s yes in the ' 80s and and early '90s but this was the first time I really spent dedicated time in China and I wound up writing a book because I got so tired of reading in the western press about the oppressive corrupt government and the unhappy oppressed people okay and I said to myself I've made over 80 trips how come I've never met any of these unhappy oppressed people okay but you you travel to both the cities and the rural area yeah but I'd say probably 75 % would have been big cities big cities okay most of the other time I Was Here For Pleasure with my family with my kids and uh okay yeah so but I developed a pretty good feel for China overall so I I wrote a book that largely uh examines the real differences between the US and China because the US is always saying our model is the only right model that
ultimately every everyone is going to become a democracy by the way I don't believe that at all so the US is an individualistic model going back to escaping Europe China is very much a collective model MH uh us has a relatively they don't like to hear these
words a relatively weak government by Design so when the founding fathers
start to develop the constitution in the US they basically said let's do everything we can to minimize what the government is allowed to do because this is should be a country of by and for the people okay um and China on the other hand had a very strong central government has going back thousands of years it's always at that in part I
think because people need to come together to protect against the evasions from the North and then also the number of catastrophes weather catastrophes that required people to come together to kind of rebuild so the model was very much so the US simp have a natural National border so much safer compar to totally China yeah we had no equivalence I mean when settlers arrived in IND in the US the country was basically owned by Indians who were relatively unsophisticated in the US in a not very
nice way basically but seems to the the US president you know in the time of emergency for example perhaps also has a lot of power yes and and the Congress can also you know set up new laws to overrule yes you know the old old ones right in a time of emergency maybe so that makes the US quite a flexible dealing with crisis and also during
peaceful time maybe government try to minimize the size yeah but but there is a one very significant difference is the best and the brightest young people in the US almost always go into business go to business do not government they and and medical field yeah because that's where you make most of make a lot of money make a lot make a lot of money exactly okay and the best and the brightest going back to the Mandarin tradition in China generally would into public service and government right right yes but the net effect is you know if I think about the people I've met in the Chinese government they are Highly Educated they tend to be pretty worldly and have had jobs in different sectors but how would you compare this kind of us system with European countries
because you know the the whole process we call you know soal modern civilization whether that be Scientific Revolution or Industrial Revolution they actually started in Europe and but how the European countries political system
differ from the US or they're similar they're similar in the sense that they're both democracies MH so you rely on votes to select your leaders but there democracy comeon much later right starting in the 18th century 19th century none of the European country was Democrat was had a democracy yeah it was on the mor most yeah but and and you also had Europe was very deeply ingrained class system whereas the us from the very beginning was not a class system I mean the purpose was equal opportunity for everyone because they were escaping Europe which was a class system right right um but I think the economies evolved in in Fairly similar
ways the I think the difference in the US is the US relied very much on
immigration for creativity so a lot of the Great Inventions discoveries they
came out of America really can be traced back to Europeans okay who immigrated to
the United States frequently because they wanted to escape oppression okay seems from the Chinese point of view you know when I talk to lots of Chinese whether they from different background when they talk about the US seem they
have they have a much bigger uh picture in their mind is they talk about West
and they know that the rise of the West started in Europe so therefore they like
to compare what's the major difference between Europe and China then starting
from there they try to then they next they move to what the major difference between us and China yeah so therefore I would have to know from a your point of view you know if you compare Europe with China and compare Europe with the US what kind of you know major difference
in terms of whether that be political system or institutions or some other
background you you see the contrast between us and China seems much striking
larger yes but if you compare Europe and China especially in the 16 17 18 19
century when Europe rose up maybe the difference was different or different type of difference how would you see
that well I mean I mean obviously there wasn't that much interaction between the
Europeans and China until the Opium Wars in the 19th century right and I think
especially Great Britain which kind of took the lead I think that created a pretty high level of tension between
China and the Europeans right I think the Americans played a role in the Opium Wars but it wasn't a dramatic role and I
think the uh I'd say the U the Europeans in general were more aggressive also they they seem
their their government had a more centralized power yeah to to facilitate industrialization right like that's why
first world war second world war took place among those European countries well I I think I mean to me the the main
thing that happened in the 19th century is that China missed the Industrial Revolution that's a very interesting so
so you had the Ching Dynasty run by by the Manus uh where frankly you have examples
like Empress shishi who spent the treasury on rebuilding the Summer Palace
as opposed to the Navy which is what it was meant for yeah so I I think the inward focus of the Manus under the
Chang Dynasty uh led to a lack of interest in what was going on in the
rest of the world and not any real intellectual curiosity so when you had the Brit show up for the first time with
here are all of our discoveries and here's what's enabling us to modernize the response from the EMP or Emperor at
the time was very much we have nothing to learn from the West I think so that time China really was not aware or know
very little about what's going on in Europe exactly otherwise you think they might have behaved differently than yeah
absolutely absolutely so if you think about Chinese history if you missed the Industrial Revolution which was really
affecting most of the advanced Western countries and the US and the UK probably
played a prominent role that's also why you know historians often talk about you
know Germany used to be a backward area or Nation you know was not even unified
and and until maybe late uh second half of 19th century then Germany start to
emerge as a as a power yes uh so how could Germany uh do that whereas other
European nations like Poland I don't know failed to achieve that yeah and also in Asia Japan you know came uh into
place and uh but people also talk about how come Japan succeeded in capturing
the the process of industrialization whereas China keep falling behind if you
take those two examples I mean what was uh the common denominator is both
Germany and Japan uh were very anxious to build up their industrial might for for military reasons so China I mean Japan was very aggressive militarily Visa China Visa
Russia uh and other areas so I think once you start down that track then you
want to be able to build ships you want to be able to build an army you want to be able to build everything that goes with military might and Germany exactly the same Germany was a you know obviously a very major player in European wars in the late 19th century
and then very aggressive and active in World War I and World War II so I think
a lot in those two cases the industrialization followed a military
spin you know war created a capitalism so capitalism arise in Europe not in
Asia because they had a constant state of wars and those war created demand for
different type of organization different type of financing and obviously uh
created the need to encourage Commerce because that give you the money to to finance Wars and therefore so-called
militaristic State way of industrialization actually came much earlier like starting from Renaissance those Italian city state like Venice they were essentially militaristic uh State on one hand they
need Commerce on one other hand they need strong army or military so later on
uh as a later uh uh like Germany and Japan they need to do more otherwise
they would not be able to squeeze in to become a power so all the European powers like in France you know Louis the 14 and other Leonia and they so all the European powers had this feature of militaristic industrialization so maybe that's another explanation for for China's fure they never thought of or wanted to go that road I I think chin
dasty perhaps has another reason because they are like you mention the minority
to control the major hand people you know like even like a city state like a
Venice if they want to rise up they need uh essentially everyone to be able to
fight and everyone to be able to do business yeah but if Chinese government the Chinese government do that that means all the the financial resources and the minitary power will shift to to the hand people that will create a threat so maybe that's an additional reason they didn't take that route whereas for Japan once they have the
Emperor who they you know the god the god of everyone that seem that problem
at least can be solved I don't know so that's one perspective yeah of of course
us that become very different now because us does not did not rely on M you know they did not have any more kings queens but the us later on also like today you look at the US this military uh comp complex industrial complex m is something analogous to that uh that kind of tradition yes very
strong in that so people developing count think that this seems to be one of
the essential element for any country to become industrialized you need that to create the huge incentive and demand for
heavy Industries yes for lots of other things and for technology adoption and otherwise you will be defeated yeah be be killed so that's that's one View and of course the US has a lot of different features like they minimize the size of
government but that's impossible for European if you do that perhaps you will be the next one to to be to be destroyed
yeah how do you think this kind of perspective this is essentially the view of uh brale and and sbat you know the think of war created capitalism so people say why capitalism never arises in East uh in Asia uh this provide one
explanation of course according to Max Weber that he has a different view his a religions different Christian people
they are more industr they like to save but that view seems not very consistent
with history because the Jewish people also you know very INR is were like to say Chinese or the Buddhist people
perhaps they all they may be also good at doing I don't know yeah uh those kind of things but they were not able to rise
maybe because of the lack of centralized militaristic yeah industrialization
motive what you call like a national will to use that will to mobilize resources to organize the nation in a different way to compete with the European nations yeah but the US was able to do that uh maybe not in the very
beginning but the us know that right they know the European how they behave so the us later on also built a military also through the Civil War that further enhanced the the US military capacity so that good play a role so China when China became sort of kind of have a mind set where we do need a national Army to be militarized was during the Civil War and the war against Japan so that helped the Chinese finally to to be organized militarily MH to fight and with that military uh fighting capacity that you
enter the social planning era but a social planning era although you have a strong military kind of mindset but you did not allow Market it flourish so you miss one part Anda solved that he not only inherited this kind of kind of military institutional capacity but also allowed Market whereas the chiny had maybe just Market but know this kind of lack of this I think there's there's two fundamental differences between the US
and and Europe Europeans have always been a very highly fragmented continent
right so you've got language differences you have cultural differences you have religious differences and you also have
the fact that war in the 19th century was almost a constant state I mean right
up through World War I and then kicking in in World War II so uh I think that
fragmentation and even though they tried to solve it to some extent by creating the EU there are still fairly significant differences among the major countries it was a huge Advantage for the US and China to basically have a large single language integrated country right um and the US had the added advantage of while it was involved in
Wars it was never on their own land so one of the reason I think for the economic success of the US is is they were able to avoid war other than selectively joining as they did obviously in World War I and World War War I right right and then China the same thing I mean China the challenge
for many years was the internal fighting of the Warlords and the Civil War uh but
once under dung China became very focused on Market driven economy and and
consumerism uh dung just did an extraordinary job in a short period of time so this is interesting so you know
East European countries also conducted Market reform and they economic Foundation was much more Superior you
know they had a social plan everybody they built a lot of Industries including Min Industries how come AFA introducing
Market reform they could not perform as well as China so you mentioned about
ding what's the major difference between dingin leadership versus you know the leadership in East European countries
where did they go wrong in a sense you know this they have they had a much better Foundation to the market reform
they did not go through culture reevolu fing so what's your you know view on this yeah I think a huge Advantage China
has always had is just scale okay so when you've got a consumer population
today of a billion four um e even when you look at the Asian tigers so when you
looked at Hong Kong and Singapore and Taiwan and Korea they have not been able
to create anywhere near the economic footprint that China has created in part
because of the the scale of the country the population in China yes okay so
economy of scale is very important that may also explain the US success compared to European countries us had much larger
scale right so even though German Engineers they may be very good the Japanese may be very good but your scale
of economy is very limited yes right so on the other hand um there's also maybe
some Advantage for smaller countries for example you know you you need to develop an economy you need a mass production
and you need a global market but uh the size of Singapore because perhaps they only need a tiny bit of Global Market
that can support their industrialization yes whereas China need the entire Earth and the Earth is very limited so that
may also make it smaller countries somehow easier under way of in terms of
creating Global Market yeah uh you know I heard that during Singapore's industrialization process in the' 60s uh
' 50s '70s they had a huge sector of uh manufacturing work but that market alone
is able to support lots of people's employment uh for China you cannot just rely on that yeah you need to r on
perhaps other much larger market such as textile and but the textile Market globally is very limited the US give
China some quota that's it I heard from you know Taiwanese Economist they say you know us give them Coda and soon the
coda was filled then have they have to search for Alternative Market this fortunately China open their door for
reform so China become taiwan's largest possible Global Market to absorb their
uh industrial output so then you look from that point of view it's harder for China where's the global market now the
US is also trying to shrink China's Global Market so that may will make you think that will make China's
industrialization process harder to to Finish Well harder first of all I think the idea of containing China is a ridiculous idea because if you look at the economic momentum of China if you look at the cultural advantages Chinese people just work harder than Americans and and there's no denying that that's
also the same view from the Europeans they say Americans work much harder than the Europe Europeans oh no absolutely I
mean look at European I mean the number of strikes um and and uh uh and the number
of holidays I mean when when we McKenzie hire people inth America from France and from
Spain I mean they just are used to a model that is far less demanding whereas
China is is again dramatically harder worker so having worked at McKinsey and
worked in many of our us offices and then the same in China it's very different how how different well well first of all if you were to go to most Americans and say you're going to work six days a week not five you're gonna
work from 9 to nine uh they'd say you're crazy I mean
but that's just just it would not be accepted that's R in the US right but in the you go back to 19th century perhaps
of the American average Americans work as hard as Chinese they work for 6 days even seven days per per day perhaps yeah
may maybe during times of challenge like War times but um I think I mean if I
think about my father who grew up in the 20s 30s and 40s his hours were not
dissimilar from people working in the US today okay okay when I would work with
the Beijing or Shanghai office at McKenzie uh you you would just if if you
watch you would see the lights on very late at night and then you'd see people falling asleep at their desk during the
day cuz they basically got no sleep maybe there's a pattern later Comer you have to work harder than the earlier
ones yeah so you us people American people work harder than Europeans the Chinese people have to work harder than
the US in order to come up otherwise it's impossible so just like the Germany and the Japan they need to be far more
militaristic State otherwise they could there's no chance for them to rise up because the state was already fully
occupied like you know in Academia you know in the US it's so normal for all
the professors stay in their office until 8 9 sometimes even midnight but I
travel to Europe it's impossible if you do that the people other people will look down at you why why do you need to
work so hard sure so around five or four everybody just lock other people's door say let's go home yeah uh but uh you
precisely us is a latecomer in terms of industrialization maybe that explains why us behave differently otherwise but
China compared to us is much even later Comer that's maybe one one way to
explain but in the future once China become rich you will see Indians Indian people walk much harder and the Chinese
start to relax and they want to get off around four and they only want work for
you know 3 or 5 days a week yeah I would say the Chinese work much smarter than
the Indians do so I'll give you an example I was living I was visiting Deli
I was my family and I were going to go to rajastan in the north we were on this
beautiful six Lane highway coming out of Delhi six Lane Highway very good well
each way okay and and but it turned into a dirt road after about 50 miles oh okay
all right I said well what happened oh the new mayor oh doesn't support rajastan and doesn't respect what they
do so he just stopped the road okay so the amount of ir what I would call economic irrationality in India is huge
this is huge so even though the people are very smart and they turn out more
high-end students which we saw at McKenzie than almost any other country you do not have anything like the system
in China where you've got large numbers of Highly Educated people advanced
meritocratic in the party and they're all on the same page I mean getting all Indians I mean just start with the
Muslims and the and the Hindus um they are they are not a United Country right
I I think the US for 150 years has been the top economy in the world I think one
reason you see very little intellectual curiosity in the US about what other
countries are doing uh is because they've been so used to the idea that we're number on one reason they push
back against China's success is because it's a dualistic mindset with winners and
losers so Americans genuinely believe that if China is very successful they
win we lose yeah that's and and you explain that to Chinese people and they say why do you look at it that why don't
you just say don't we want both sides to win if you just think about in our government and listening to government
people talk about China they know nothing about China the rain they know and I talk I well I talked I the the
Biden Administration and the even the Trump administ they have a lots of people seem they know China very well so
well so that they can design good policy to contain China let's let's just say they
very confident I would say grossly overconfident in what they know about China okay I think if you ask them what
are tell me about Confucianism they say oh we know all about that the Confucian
institutes were put in the US to spy when you say no I'm talking about
the Confucian values you wouldn't find more than 5% of Americans who could
explain anything about Confucianism I was at peing University and they said Pete we had a delegation of 16 Congress
people all very focused on China in a negative way of the 16 one had been to
China three times one had been to China once 14 had never been to China who are
they I don't know okay okay just about but still it it it it's a it's a very
small number right and when you when you listen to congressman who generally are
very aggressive about China and always explaining China and the way it works so
they'll frequently say well it's inevitable that China will become a democracy because the Chinese people are
so unhappy and you say well what evidence do you actually they don't have
any evidence because they never been and how do you explain maybe on the
other hand maybe natural because I believe those congressmen most of them have gone to Europe or even to Japan but
China just recently become Dev you know s developing developed so therefore they have not had the chance who want to go
to a backward underdeveloped country right the incentive was not there you go
to you go to you know more devop or equal when China just recently stting to emerge maybe they did not have the
chance yet I mean I I just see it as a level of overconfidence based on 150 years of
being number one 150 years okay and yeah I mean it goes back to literally the late 1800s when the Industrial
Revolution really gained Steam mhm uh and the US talks about uh the theft of
intellectual property like this is a unique thing during the 19th century the
US had a huge Department in Washington whose only job was to steal int elect
property from the Brits yes yes so so this has been going on for years yeah
and actually the same Brits they when during their time you know rise up they
spent lot of energy stealing technology from Italy yeah you know and ital still still
technology from Arabs yeah so this this this has been going on forever forever
that's right but later on you has become an innovator so and and since then they start to thinking you know have always
been innovator and we're number one that's that's true but it it's I mean China is innovative but in a different
way China is much more application driven so when the iPhone comes out the
things like the iPhone and the internet and and what I would call call the big economic ideas they tend to come from
America uh but if you look at the actual development of applications yeah so if
you take the iPhone and look at all the businesses in China that have been built
around the iPhone it's pretty impressive and huge but the same actually for the
us as you mentioned in the 19 century us was a student of Europe yes and all the
technology the learn they copied even they stole but you know through that
process later on you become on the top yeah maybe China was still in the stage
of like early us yeah mostly r on learning and mimicking y but uh later on
China will become you know a innovator on the top because you already start to see science many weere right maybe
that's a natural process for indiaan someday may be the same you know India maybe nowaday or perhaps next decades is
still very good student of learning copying and but eventually they may
become on the top become a you know uh innovator in the frontier I remember
that in the 19th century us if you if you search for encyclopedia you search
for a famous American scientist doing pure science you find none zero but the
19th century by the end of 19th Cur us was already become a top in terms of industrialization in terms of eCommerce
in terms of application but uh zero in pure scientific research but once enter
the 20th century entering then us become on the top and in the early stage us walk actually rely on immigrants from
Europe because they have the two Wars yeah but later on us start to have its own very famous and very Innovative uh
scientists more more more un Americans and they you don't longer see European names maybe that's just a natural
process so nowadays you still see China as you know very good at learning
mimicking but you never know I don't know maybe 20 years down the road China may also start to have very Innovative
uh not just the technology but also in terms of basic research yeah the government is now pumping money into
universities and universities are reforming their way of educating people
so this maybe a natural pattern but may not always be will because me c eventually could not move to the
frontier but in many ways China's already there I mean if you look at wuwei wuwei was the global leader in
technology and Telecom with 5G and that was that was pretty impressive and if you look at what China has done in EVS
right uh and what they did in High-Speed Rail right uh so there are a lot of areas where China has I think
leapfrogged the rest of the world you think of the US policy now actually is actually pushing or encouraging Chinese
to do to become innovator in chip IND otherwise why would they have the incentive it's much cheaper to buy us
chips and high quality low price you do on your own very costantly and now you
say you do on your own we W sell to you that may actually push China to there the the reason you do want to become re
reasonably independent as you can't count on globalization MH um I personally think that the contained
China movement history will look back on that as a very foolish idea because what
you're doing is you're really encouraging China to double down on its investment in the areas where us has a
strength and if you push the ultimate globalization or Economic Development you you're going to find that the
Chinese once they get truly independent of the US they have long memories
they're not going to go back to the US and say well okay now let's be friends they're going to say you W there for us
and now we've matched you we're going to go our own way which would be a Los
