Instead of the ideological construct of an impending war or a New Cold War, let us explore the alternative of a much more constructive principle of ‘live and let live’. Derived from the Dutch merchants’ law of medieval origin, this principle was based on the idea that merchants in their trading practices, rather than the local magistrates, should be the ones to decide on the laws governing their business. While kings and generals contemplated expansion, conquest, and dominance, the merchants knew it was better and more profitable to have peace with other parties and benefit from trading with all.
‘Live and let live’ also means to respect each other’s ways of living; it recognises cultural diversity despite the persistence of injustice. Is there any nation without its skeletons? On what grounds, then, should we exacerbate the sufferings of others on the claim that our way of living is the best?
Sometimes businesspeople tend to have a better sense of reality in their trading and commercial transactions than political leaders, who are more prone to ideological or populist demands. ‘Live and let live’ as a principle means fair distribution of goods and profits so that all involved may benefit from trade and commerce and coexist peacefully. This principle is much closer to the Chinese notion of harmony than metaphors like ‘sleeping lion’ or ‘Thucydides’s Trap’. Adopting principles of this type will help lower the temperature fuelled by belligerent rhetoric and create a sense of trust. ‘Live and let live’ also means to respect each other’s ways of living; it recognises cultural diversity despite the persistence of injustice. Is there any nation without its skeletons? On what grounds, then, should we exacerbate the sufferings of others on the claim that our way of living is the best? That is exactly what we should have learned from the atrocities examined above, from the Arab Spring and the Afghan fiasco.
Unfortunately, the reality in the world now is far from the ideal condition of harmony anywhere we look. In China, despite economic growth, a harmonious society is more of an ideal than reality in people’s lives, and during Mao’s China for much of the 20th century, ‘class struggle’ used to dominate social and political life and it may still have some influence. In recent years, nationalist sentiment is on the rise, particularly among the younger generation, and instead of opening up, the government is increasingly tightening its ideological control over the media, the education system, and intellectual life in general to counter the influence of Western ideas.
This shows a structural problem in the Chinese political system, and under President Xi, many are worried that China is moving backward toward Mao’s totalitarian rule, undoing many of the positive results during the period of Deng Xiaoping’s reform and opening up. Outside China, The Five Eyes alliance, the QUAD, and more recently the AUKUS, all these intelligence and military alliances make Beijing feel, quite understandably, trapped and besieged. The response from Beijing becomes more assertive than previous administrations and has trouble maintaining the traditional idea of hé or harmony. And that creates a very dangerous situation, the forming of the Great Fracture, the intense competition and rivalry captured by the metaphor of Thucydides’s Trap.
In China, despite economic growth, a harmonious society is more of an ideal than reality in people’s lives, and during Mao’s China for much of the 20th century, ‘class struggle’ used to dominate social and political life and it may still have some influence.
At a dangerous moment like this, we must not forget that both China and Europe, both East and West, have long traditions that have made great contributions to human culture and civilisation. Cultural dialogue and diplomacy rather than military conflict and war should be the way leading to a peaceful future. If nations could put aside a belligerent, zero-sum ideology in favour of ‘live and let live’ there would be no rivalry between the US and China, and the world might survive and even prosper. Only then, through contact of real people, communication, exchange, dialogue and discussion, could democracy as a spiritual value have a chance of winning peoples’ hearts and minds, and eventually become a reality of many nations in their own distinct ways.