John J. Mearsheimer: Can China Rise Peacefully?

Рет қаралды 160,776

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 915

@kmich7660 7 ай бұрын

The right question should be "Can USA decline peacefully?" Compared to USA, China has been boringly peaceful for decades . 😊

@obarack888 7 ай бұрын

at 34:10 mark, the audience asked this question. Mearsheimer basically says US is a ruthless hegemon and will try to prevent China from a peaceful rise (at 38:40)

@一个说话大声的中国人 7 ай бұрын

China is only peaceful to some, exclude the USA. The true losers can't remember any facts. China has killed thousands of UN army soldiers already. China is the ONLY UN member that had killed thousands of UN soldiers, including thousands of the US soldiers, led by the US five-star general and superior emperor of Japan, Douglas MacArthur. John J. Mearsheimer is a true loser, and a low class one.

@cosmicdancer 7 ай бұрын

That is a good question to ask because we have seen that the West had risen with unspeakable brutality -- from slave trade to looting of natural resources from colonial lands to devastation of native populations. The answer to your question appears to be affirmative considering the military conflicts involving the USA.

@Study-mq4qn 6 ай бұрын

The former foreign secretary of Britain has said it took Britain 100 years to get used to not being number one.

@一个说话大声的中国人 6 ай бұрын

very true! USSR did decline peacefully USSR could have asked the US to share everything half and half otherwise we all die

@bircruz555 6 ай бұрын

"Can China Rise Peacefully?" That is the wrong question. The correct question is, "Can the US decline peacefully?"

@sionghiankwik9397 6 ай бұрын

This question immediately disqualify because of the "peacefully" at the end.

@sakcee 6 ай бұрын

Shut up CCP bot

@a55tech 6 ай бұрын

probably, US only fights lopsided wars technologically, the people are soft and can't tolerate many deaths

@iwanagohome326 6 ай бұрын

@@sakceeYou shut the shit up! He was absolutely right to ask if the UassA Empire of Lies can accept decline peacefully without wanting to drag the whole world down with it

@sweechen9762 6 ай бұрын

Impossible for the "exceptional" country.

@Arugula100 6 ай бұрын

The U.S. needs to accept that a non-Anglo European country can be a world power.

@WWLooi-js8rl 6 ай бұрын

It has happened many times before the U.S. even existed or the West was still in the Dark Age.

@saichung7138 6 ай бұрын

China had been the World's major power in her long history!

@dartskihutch4033 6 ай бұрын

Why would they "need to accept" that? As bad as the US is, I'd rather the US be in charge than the Chinese, and so would most of the world. Whether it will happen or not is still in question, but to say any country should "let them rise to power" is contradictory to every empire in the history of forever. No country gives up their power without a fight.

@kooshanjazayeri 6 ай бұрын

@@dartskihutch4033 well, obviously they need to accept that potentiality because it's the truth, i guess many rather the US be the hegemon but i think they've demonstrated that they are not fit for the task time and time again, (and i don't say that others are, for the record) and they are in a fast decline both morally and internally, so... we just have to see if they get their act together

@dartskihutch4033 6 ай бұрын

@@kooshanjazayeri and when in history has one country dominated the world before? This is the first, and of course any country in power will abuse it, US, China, Russia, whoever, but in scale the morals of the US as a people is what makes them more fit than say China. You understand how Chinese leadership operates right? It's hard to say that they aren't fit, when you have no relative super power of the world to compare them to. Furthermore, you understand why the US is in fast decline? It's the left, and the psyop that is taking place to deconstruct American values. Who could possibly be behind such morals which go against the pillar of the US? Open borders and overwhelming waves of immigrants who support the leftist ideology, higher taxes, ever increasing leniency for crime (California and New York in particular), constant culture wars created by the media to show division. I mean C'mon, the US has never been more divided and I'm willing to bet it's the Chinese and corrupt and bought politicians (by the Chinese) who continue to push the agenda which is creating the US divide and collapse. Why would China ever do such a thing?! For the exact reason the US does what it does, to maintain or gain power over another. I find it so naive that you think any other country currently would be a better suit than the US, and that it isn't simply a changing of the same tyranny with a different flag. Simply put, careful what you wish for, the demise of the west will not be good for the world.

@Arugula100 6 ай бұрын

The question should be "Can the U.S. allow China to rise peacefully?"

@sheavelte2917 6 ай бұрын

This question is waste time to ask. Everyone on the earth know USA will try very hard to not let any nation surpass him.

@chriswong9158 6 ай бұрын

History had told, example the Plaza Agreement 1985 Japan v USA. China will not enter that trap. This lecture was 10 years ago, and J Mearsheimer still look at China same.

@clovisra 6 ай бұрын

As John Mearsheimer said in Ottawa University (Q&A part) the US will not 'be happy' if Brazil devellops and becomes a rival. But many stupid or criminal Brazilians still believe or pretend to believe that the US government is a friend.

@chankane 6 ай бұрын

YES... THAT is the proper question! JM approaches his "realism" with American/Western values, so his realism is biased.

@TheFlagUnit 6 ай бұрын

The answer is hells naw

@hassaannaeem296 6 ай бұрын

It's always a pleasure listening to John Mearsheimer I'm currently doing my undergrad in Pol sci and today he really got into the basics of IR and clarified so many concepts.

@siddarthshah1773 Ай бұрын

Even then you will do jihaad😂 no political science works in an islamic society 😂

@davidchin35 7 ай бұрын

The question should really be: will America allow China to rise or rise peacefully

@一个说话大声的中国人 7 ай бұрын

@harshitsingh1600 6 ай бұрын

No Chinese will not rise peacefully because fundamental to rise peacefully is absence of fear and the International system is formulated in a way which will always create a security dillemma and will not allow any major power to rise peacefully.

@fongponto 6 ай бұрын

"Can" or "Could" America allow....

@belindathorne9784 6 ай бұрын

If the tables were turned would China allow America to rise peacefully?

@CMOP-c5h 7 ай бұрын

The main issue with John is that, he views China through his US lense. His main theory is based on if US did X, Y and Z, China will do X, Y and Z whilst not appreciating the difference in culture of these 2 countries undermines his key points completely. Some said John is an anti-war, that is so untrue. He is against what NATO does in Ukraine but thinks US should put the whole world at risk of being wiped out by provoking China and Taiwan as well as going to war if required.

@rolandwong9306 7 ай бұрын

He has described his theory repeatedly for more than 10 years without any change. He has grown older but not wiser. He views the cultural aspects of geopolitics solely from a Euro-centric approach. The world order of China is not the world order of JM and the US.

@一个说话大声的中国人 7 ай бұрын

@Faye_Liu 6 ай бұрын

Completely agree with both comments. These people can never get out of their Western centric view, end up their entire perspective is nothing but projection. Not taking accounts of Chinese historical precedents and cultural differences makes his theory on China baseless.

@一个说话大声的中国人 6 ай бұрын

US did genocide the native Americans, China will do genocide the Americans, because no more native Americans.

@hitthedeck4115 6 ай бұрын

"...whilst not appreciating the difference in culture..." -> We need to understand that John is an academic in realism school of thought. Realism theory doesn't concern itself with cultures, it's mainly about great power politics. Like in other academic fields, you pick a field and a specific theory (e.g. Physics, string theory), and become an expert in that particular topic.

@stevenng5238 6 ай бұрын

The question is not whether China can rise peacefully or not. The question is: Can the USA ( Empire) take it peacefully? If all the anti-China policies, sanctions and disinformation are factored in together with war-mongering industries and Washington's self-interests, the Empire will likely go rage, rage and rage into the good night.

@dfdf-rj8jr 6 ай бұрын

China has far more protectionism, "anti-USA policies" (wumao like you), and disinformation than the USA. The USA returns 1% of that, and all of the wumao go crazy.

@josephguo6256 7 ай бұрын

China had risen peacefully already.

@一个说话大声的中国人 7 ай бұрын

@urimtefiki226 6 ай бұрын

yes it can

@JaiRudraNath 6 ай бұрын

Not yet .. not yet

@darthvadeth6290 6 ай бұрын

it will keep rising

@JaiRudraNath 6 ай бұрын

@@darthvadeth6290 - unless everyone comes together to stop it ..

@odin5166 6 ай бұрын

He is an American and no matter what he still prefer America to be the hegemon. Its very difficult for westerners to accept to be outdone by Asians after many centuries of world dominance and I can understand this . But the fact Asia rises and the west decline is becoming a reality and nothing can stop it.

@harshitsingh1600 6 ай бұрын

No not Asians only " Han Chinese" don't group Asians to further your objectives. Chinese were and are the greatest benefactor of being in the bed with the West since 1970s . Remember Nixon and Mao reopening and China admitted in WTO .

@henryneoch7366 6 ай бұрын

Yes ! Yes ! Yes !! Nothing can stop it. CHINA IS UNSTOPPABLE !!!

@inveele 6 ай бұрын

Asians don't make enough babies to keep the momentum on

@shadanahmad6843 6 ай бұрын

this

@MarkMcelligottPeaches 6 ай бұрын

I agree completely. His GPP is based on American dominance as well as American self exceptionalism. This is not Chinese behavior. He's an American and cannot understand China at all. But I've always believed this professor is actually a CIA puppet.

@sarahkhan2310 7 ай бұрын

China is a blessing and benefactor to the world 👍♥️🇨🇳

@一个说话大声的中国人 7 ай бұрын

@dartskihutch4033 6 ай бұрын

Uhhhhhh careful now. Just because you hate the US doesn't mean China is a "blessing". You must be very naive to the doings and history of China.

@dfdf-rj8jr 6 ай бұрын

wumao

@一个说话大声的中国人 6 ай бұрын

@@dfdf-rj8jr comfort woman

@Hoo88846 6 ай бұрын

@@dfdf-rj8jrCIA paid bot

@victorhuynh4031 6 ай бұрын

10 years past from this lecture and China still not in any war.

@willengel-vs8ht 6 ай бұрын

you probably aren't aware there was a standoff of 2 carrier battle groups made noise around the man-made islands in 2016. US lost the standoff.

@iwanagohome326 6 ай бұрын

Was this lecture 10 years old? I thought it was a recent lecture, like maybe a week ago?

@Zzzk155 6 ай бұрын

@@iwanagohome326watch again, the first minutes gave description this video recorded in 2014

@Zzzk155 6 ай бұрын

Mearsheimer point is not that great power war between US and China is inevitable. What Mearsheimer believe is that security competition between them is likely, not great power war

@Melange2 6 ай бұрын

10 years later and his prediction that Chinas relationship with USA will become more antagonistic and war between them are closer than before have definitely come true

@JamieMorlok 7 ай бұрын

Mearsheimer isn't an expert on China like Kishore Mahbubani. So whatever he opines about China is limited.

@harshitsingh1600 6 ай бұрын

Yess yes !! Mehbubani is a expert because he says West bad and China good . Right ?

@Zzzk155 6 ай бұрын

Mearsheimer isn't expert on China on cultural and historical aspect of that country. He's more focused on security issues regarding China

@Zzzk155 6 ай бұрын

Mahbubani basically has more positive views regarding China's rise as great power

@saintzig 6 ай бұрын

While his view might be limited it may be a good place to start for westerners who are new to the topic.

@一个说话大声的中国人 6 ай бұрын

But can China Rise Peacefully? John and Mearsheimer's realism ignores real facts, including the Chinese killing thousands of soldiers of the UN army, talking about against the whole world, including the killing of thousands of American soldiers in Korea, which was done with inferior weapons. Thanks to Americans constantly reminding the Chinese of genocide, Now, with equal or even superior weapons and nukes, the Chinese will genocide Americans for sure to serve justice for Native Americans.

@crhu319 7 ай бұрын

35:34 "the Chinese have precipitated remarkably few crises" and yes do have "a vested interest in rising peacefully" while "the United States is a ruthless great power" that just ignored Nixons advice to assist Russia.

@一个说话大声的中国人 7 ай бұрын

@Branch7ShuZhi 6 ай бұрын

There are two weaknesses in John's assumption - The lack of understanding on cultural difference and historical development of the Chinese. There is this missional topic about Cross-Cultural study in order for one to be effective in missional outreach into a different culture. The same is needed to understand India etc. Territorial disputes in Asia are legacy imposed and caused by the West during the colonial period of the past. We in Asia believe that multilateralism in a multi-polar world will works better for world peace.

@RonnyMcAndrews 6 ай бұрын

Agreed... basing Chinese future behavior based on American characteristics is ridiculous.

@tc-fz5qn 6 ай бұрын

JM cannot help being an American and can only project his American Consciousness (or lack of), and experiences on China. Would be beneficial for him to research China's history as he did European history, especially on his understanding of Ukraine. Spending time with people like George Yeo and Kishore Mahbhubani, could certainly be very helpful in giving him deeper insights and nuances into the Chinese mind. His understanding of Taiwan's relationship with the mainland is pathetic. Folks like him and Ziggy Brezinsky (can't spell his name!), reveals their Consciousness have not evolved from those barbaric days of survival winner takes all mentality and what's yours is mine and what's mine remains mine! No concept of Win- Win and shared prosperity.

@CJN3423. 6 ай бұрын

Basically, for John's theories that the world's conflicts and wars needed to be maintained or even created by the USA in other countries, so it can keep its brutality hegemony power indefinitely... Therefore, with the similar but opposite reasoning for the argument is that, to have a more peaceful and prosperous world, the USA must become weaker and poorer as much as possible, so it's no longer be able to creat so many wars and miseries in the world! 😂

@churblefurbles 6 ай бұрын

More than that, the loss of US social cohesion is permanent due to its immigration policy, its military capability is only going to decline.

@SumTingWong888 6 ай бұрын

B.S. territorial dispute among country in Asia have been there before the west.

@arctic004 6 ай бұрын

There is so much in this lecture that a whole class could and should be given on its interpretation.

@mingouczjcz3800 7 ай бұрын

In core, professor Mearishimar is a dangerous extremist, rather than a realist. In reality, there always co-exists might vs anti-might, force vs anti-force, or action vs reaction force. But he single-mindedly preachs his type of alternative reality, “might makes rule". That's, brutal violence sets world order. The consequence is the U.S. is quickly depleting its diplomatic strength and financial resources, and declining quickly too.

@一个说话大声的中国人 7 ай бұрын

@wenling3487 7 ай бұрын

He is an Amercican Exceptionist, for sure.

@harshitsingh1600 6 ай бұрын

And give me your theory of why China would not want to become the greatest power in the system. Have you been a decision maker in their system or you are an astrologer that China will not behave exactly like west in future. Comeon mr expert i wanna hear your " Theory"

@fabiengerard8142 6 ай бұрын

His realistic worldviews are interesting, but still US-overcentred. He completely fails in understanding the unique Chinese mindset, which is the very key of that civilization's exceptional capacity of sustainability for 4+ millenia. Such a pity he's probably too old to learn more seriously about Taoism...

@一个说话大声的中国人 6 ай бұрын

@@fabiengerard8142 Since you mentioned Taoism... Johnny boy should know something about Christianity and have heard of God Bless America numerous times... If Christianity has any value, little Johnny should know that God must go against the communists in China for being godless. If God Bless America has any value, Johnny should not worry about China's rise violently.

@garydecad6233 5 ай бұрын

An excellent and pragmatic presentation as well as the Q & As .

@EhyehShaddaiYHWH 7 ай бұрын

Banger I love this guy and he has good things to say on Israel Gaza

@Gwynbleidd503 7 ай бұрын

Read "Towers of Ivory and Steel" and ask yourself why Reed still partners with universities that violate human rights and John gave a great talk so on that note keep it up

@一个说话大声的中国人 7 ай бұрын

@dunzhen 7 ай бұрын

Mearsheimer is an honest imperialist, that's what I appreciate about him. Most are not. Not the best covering China but relatively great in the West.

@一个说话大声的中国人 7 ай бұрын

@wenling3487 6 ай бұрын

I can't agree more. He is basically against anything bad to US supremacy, domestic or abroad

@cliu5998 6 ай бұрын

Americans get nightmares about what they have done all over the world.🙏

@kooshanjazayeri 6 ай бұрын

and sadly continue to do so... they are even doing it internally to themselves at this point.. recipe for disaster

@dfdf-rj8jr 6 ай бұрын

Ah yes, the most peaceful and prosperous era in human history. Truly evil stuff by America.

@kooshanjazayeri 5 ай бұрын

@@dfdf-rj8jr well, it was a great era, more or less, more for some, less and almost none existent for others, but the best thing to do, is to acknowledge the wrongs one has done, and is doing, and stop covert operations and meddling in other people's choices and politics, if done, this will ensure their as well as others peace and prosperity, And more, ensure the increasing of prosperity, and avoid catastrophes in the future, you have to know, these critiques are from a place of love, not hate the golden rule in life as in war and in politics is to love thy neighbors as yourselves,

@stevemcjob 5 ай бұрын

I'm sure the shit hole you are posting from has received untold millions in U.S. funded aid, Protection by U.S. made weapons, or you live in a communist totalitarian dystopia and are getting paid pennies to push state propaganda.

@dfdf-rj8jr 5 ай бұрын

@@kooshanjazayeri Before 1945, the US rarely interfered in Middle Eastern politics. How come you weren't all peaceful and happy then? If US meddling is the root of all problems, why wasn't the world happy and peaceful before 1945?

@Nicer2BNice 6 ай бұрын

Haha. I didn’t realize that that talk was from 2014 until about half way through…

@Zzzk155 6 ай бұрын

First minutes of this video basically give description that this video recorded in 2014

@owenthecook 6 ай бұрын

Judging by the 180+ US military bases and 40+ biolabs surrounding it, I’d take a jab here and say “No?”

@RonnyMcAndrews 6 ай бұрын

You cannot explain the rise and future of China following Western guide lines... especially not the United States behavior which has always been violent, capitalist and expansionist... it just doesn't make sense. China is not an expansionist, aggressive empire like the US and the EU these days that cannot endure equal competition.

@dartskihutch4033 6 ай бұрын

They haven't been expansionist because they have never had the power to do so.. don't be naive, you think China wouldn't act like the US if they had an overwhelming military? Or even worse than the US? You don't judge a country on their behaviours when powerless, you judge them on their actions when in power. It's easy for someone with no power to be morally righteous, it takes immense effort for a powerful person to be morally righteous.

@RonnyMcAndrews 6 ай бұрын

@@dartskihutch4033 You don't understand the Chinese ethos. The answer is no. America is an aggressive expansionist power which subjugates other people. That's not China. China is a trading empire. Always was.. always will be. Just look at China's efforts in third world countries in Asia, Africa and South America... their cooperation is in unison with local governments, not building military bases and demanding power over those countries everywhere like the US does, but building infrastructure and improving local commerce so international trade becomes valuable to China. That's an essential difference between these 2 world powers. PS... Don't forget civilization in China is thousands of years older than the US & Europe.

@dfdf-rj8jr 6 ай бұрын

"China good, West bad" right wumao?

@albertcadgame8314 6 ай бұрын

true. Exactly !

@zenli2233 4 ай бұрын

@@dartskihutch4033 In fact, Chinese people prefer to do business with you. China's thousands of years of wisdom is: war is always a losing business.

@勿忘在莒 6 ай бұрын

Hehe, Mr. John J. Mearsheimer? He thinks that the Chinese think in the same way that he thinks, with limited vision. Does a power always seek hegemony? In your Westerner's mentality, absolutely yes. But in the oriental wisdom, no, at least not necessarily. Chinese research tanks nowadays know way more about the US than the reverse. John might have been to China for times but still hasn't got a clue about the oriental wisdom. After thousands of years of precipitation, we have found that "if disagreed, be a better yourself to invite agreement"! But the American theory is "if disagreed, I will kill you"!

@hitthedeck4115 6 ай бұрын

That's what the Realism school of thought (a model of international relation between countries) says, it's not about the person. Anyone who picks Realism (or specializes in, in case of academics), probably has similar thoughts and conclusions as John.

@harshitsingh1600 6 ай бұрын

@@hitthedeck4115Give me your theory mr expert why China would not want to be the greatest power in international system!!

@hitthedeck4115 6 ай бұрын

@@harshitsingh1600 Not only wanting, but they are working hard to achieve that. This is their only path according to Realism. And because of this inevitability, they will invariably clash with the US which is "the tragedy of Great Power politics" as John named his book as such.

@harshitsingh1600 6 ай бұрын

@@hitthedeck4115 That's what i m saying but many Chinese and superficial geopolitical specialist here are claiming how China is great and has different culture which will make them to take different path . All bs peddled when we can know from the capabilities which they are building like blue water navy , claiming entire SCS and grabbing land here and there . At the end as Jhon says " Why do you not want to becoming Godzilla in the anarchic world " .

@RonnyMcAndrews 6 ай бұрын

He's approaching this theory with his American mind... which is completely different from the Chinese philosophy to growth.

@eanerickson8915 6 ай бұрын

Meanwhile the rest of the world asks: Can United States fall peacefully?

@edwardcumpstey9061 3 ай бұрын

Europeans are not asking this question.

@milanstepanek4185 3 ай бұрын

@@edwardcumpstey9061 they already know the answer is no and their countries will be the battlefield

@edwardcumpstey9061 3 ай бұрын

@@milanstepanek4185 That is what I am predicting as well.

@cullenturner6447 3 ай бұрын

Did you watch what he's talking about? He said we're going towards a multipolar world and away from a unipolar world. America was that unipole. He didn't say we're going from an American unipolar world to a Chinese unipolar world because we're not. If you were paying attention he actually lists China rising as an assumption he takes for granted and goes from there and that assumption is contested by many economists both in and out of China.

@sirrys 2 ай бұрын

Not if you’re European, certainly not

@月隐谷 2 ай бұрын

John has a saying that big countries are ruthless. Like China, it conducts tariff-free trade with 33 African countries. This is completely incomprehensible to the United States.😢

@dolanl8377 6 ай бұрын

This guy doesn't understand China ang China history, that was why he said he didn't know what Chinese is going to do after 30 years later.

@jetthapeterkhoo 6 ай бұрын

Yes, he doesn't know that China has long term plans and objectives like 50 and 100 years milestones! They have a few thousand years of rise and fall, and surely they know their history well, and what to expect in time to come.

@vaska1999 6 ай бұрын

Mearsheimer is a liberal hegemonist. He's written a whole book about it and how Western hegemony must be maintained. His stance doesn't have anything to do with knowing it not knowing the history of China: I'm a retired literature professor and if I know enough about the history of China to know that it's always rejected hegemonic behaviour, I'm sure Mearsheimer too is fully aware of this. That's why he dances around the issue and needs his "theory of great power" behaviour. He needs an excuse, a rationale for what he wants, which is to persuade US elites that a war with China is necessary.

@farsalami8605 6 ай бұрын

@@vaska1999 china was the hegemon in their region, this is obvious. they even had a pretty harsh rules and rituals which was meant to confirm their dominance over their neighbours. The reasons why they never tried to project their power further can be debated. I'm convinced that it would have been impossible and hence it may not have crossed their minds. To their west any expansion would have been impossible and to the south they did try to project their power. I think their geography created a culture to go along with it..... contain themselves to the region itself. And at the time that was hard enough. Civil wars and uprisings and attacks from nomads were enough for them to be busy the whole time. " Not sure what yoy mean with ( he is a liberal hegemonist ) International relations is the most simple semi-science in the world. It just is 2+2=2 And mearsheimer is just that 2+2=4 International relations were like this 5000 years ago and to this day not much has changed

@fargr5926 6 ай бұрын

@@farsalami8605 you haven't got the point in China history yet. History-wise, the "under the sky" region was all that they care about, which only includes China proper. It was Manchu with a steppe mind brought Tibet, Mongolia, Xinjiang and Manchuria into this picture. Unless there is anything exceptional, Chinese mind is limited in this area, the area where Chinese culture is permeated. Land beyond the area, belongs to foreigners (or barbarian), not appropriate for Chinese state to take. When ROC came into being, they were even thinking to only keep China proper, somehow they eventually decided to keep what Qing left to them including Tibet and others, as it's the heritage of Qing, the last Chinese dynasty.

@farsalami8605 6 ай бұрын

@@fargr5926 " what you say... is called by people " Orientalism" which proposes that The " chinese mind" i static, it does not change. It essentially is what it was during the Qing, tang etc. If you get the opportunity... go to china and stay for a while. You'll see that they are " alomost" just like other people. Btw i know china and chinese people reasonably well. I dod not say all you said is BS....... But your conclusion is a cheap popular thing people say which is baseless at best. Chinese were btw very well aware of the world beyond them..... and had ambitions beyond " china proper" It did not work out. You miisunderstand the situation in certain era's. One thing to consider is the interaction between the sedentary people and the warrior-like nomadic people. In eurasia this came mostly from the north. And in case of china and iran this was the primary threat. they were much more preoccupied with them than anythingelse. As an example..... iran would gladly leave territory to rome to conquer than let the northers confederations defeat them Their priority was never rome.... it was always the northeners ( different names in different times ). Chinese had the same problem ( arguably.. a little less dangerous, because of the smaller numbers of the nomadic confederations= i have no data for this .... this is my logical imagination ) Anyway in went too far with my comment lol sorry... i like to speculate about history. Chinese are not the chinese of 100 year ago.... americans are not the americans of 100 years ago... Arabs are also changed.... indians have changed..... The idea of a pro-active policies has clearly taken china and indeed it was not so 300 years a go. I hope you forgive any sub-standard sentences i have made.... i think my overall comment should be intelligible

@bundsjr3216 3 ай бұрын

Mearsheimer is my hero. I’m German and he helped me more to understand my country’s history of the 20th century than all my school’s history lessons combined. He is a gift of god.

@tonywong481 6 ай бұрын

John M's theory is a theory from a bully of cowardice. It is based solely on “以小人之心，度君子之腹”. Basically he says - The #1 goal is to be the bully in your school. The #2 goal is to make sure there is no other bully in your school. Let me interpret it with an example. ...So, this kid who had been bullied by you went to learn Karate to avoid being bullied. He started by getting a white belt and working toward a black one. It does not matter the kid's intention was just to better himself so that he won't be bullied. That is because we cannot tell the future, and no one can tell others' intentions now nor in the future. So for fear of your own survival, you double down your bullying and make sure the kid does not get the black belt and potentially becomes a bully. There is no telling what the Karate kid will turn into. After all, why wouldn't the kid who you bullied before will make you pay back? You would if the table is turned. Whatever holes there is with this theory, it can be explained away with that we cannot be certain about others' intentions. The whole theory is very laughable.

@dfdf-rj8jr 6 ай бұрын

"China good, West bad" right wumao?

@jjl8511 5 ай бұрын

Nicely said! He generalized and use it to predict.

@breezeanonymous6034 6 ай бұрын

Its always amazing that why we common people are not taught these international political concepts in schools. KZbin has made it possible for common people like us to even hear such things but this is how the world works. Interesting

@sweechen9762 6 ай бұрын

Mearsheimer's theory assume rational state behaviour. The problem for the western world is that they confuse Chinese rationalism to be the same as western rationalism. It is not. China pursues greatness not through war but commerce.

@dfdf-rj8jr 6 ай бұрын

"China good, West bad" right wumao?

@rafiolak 6 ай бұрын

I like JM more and more. He is not playing around. Slaps you with his theory right in the face

@florianposchMDPhD 5 ай бұрын

Thought this talk is from 2024, found out later it is from 2014. This man had quite a lot of foresight.

@Discovery2024-rn8kn Ай бұрын

Foresight about other nations behaviour as a result of predictable American aggressive and provoking behaviour

@ericyeo805 6 ай бұрын

I can’t understand why the rise of China is bad for Taiwan. This is only in the thoughts of outsiders and especially the one from US perspective. What is so difficult to have a prosperous Taiwan within a powerful motherland and especially when they are treated with very special priority and able to functions as they used to be in politics and governance. So, why sow negativity just to ensure that Taiwan will remain status quo for the US outpost. For goodness sake, they are both Chinese and for those small numbers whose intention of independence and the uninformed gullible, selfish public to allow the Taiwan people’s interests to be ruined? Like, which state wants to be themselves when they are living in the shell of the USA, the most powerful country.

@dfdf-rj8jr 6 ай бұрын

"China good, West bad" right wumao?

@ddding9518 6 ай бұрын

@@dfdf-rj8jr Truth hurts

@Anonymous------ 6 ай бұрын

The title should be "How did China rise so peacefully and quietly?"

@BillyBoggle 6 ай бұрын

Thanks for the upload

@Zzzk155 6 ай бұрын

So this video originally recorded in 2014. So why upload now? Or this is just a reupload?

@JamesPeach 5 ай бұрын

Maybe because the speaker had become very popular recently. He gets hundreds of thousands - millions of views per video. The war with Ukraine has propelled geostrategist to popularity.

@melissasmind2846 3 ай бұрын

Listening during my walk. Perfect

@gingermintrose 6 ай бұрын

John J. Mearsheimer is not an expert. He assumes and makes his conclusion based on his US lens of geopolitics theories that is linear of competition of great powers.

@efraimofelnerlourenconeves8296 6 ай бұрын

Mozambique salutes the lecture

@PrideWang 6 ай бұрын

John is obviously not familiar with Chinese history and political traditions. China is a face-loving celestial country. In ancient times, as long as neighboring countries such as Japan, North Korea, and Vietnam paid tribute, China would not dictate their internal affairs. Just like Columbus sailed for plunder, Zheng He of China's Ming Dynasty sailed to the West to showcase China and give gifts.

@RonnyMcAndrews 6 ай бұрын

FGS he's even using Pentagon strategies to label Chinese aggressiveness... China is not the USA... which he doesn't seem to comprehend.

@henli-rw5dw 6 ай бұрын

That's not the reason. The real reason is that China's economic model does not give it incentive to be aggressive. The west gains economic advantage by taking resources and labor from other country. The Chinese, on the hand, has always been a surplus production country. What it wanted was open markets to sell it's excess production and accumulate wealth. The trade surplus and wealth disparity makes it a target of war in the past. There is no reason to think it'll be any different this time around.

@iwanagohome326 6 ай бұрын

@@henli-rw5dwDidn't the West’s rise was due significantly to plunders and wars? The stolen resources have been contributing to its First World status, up to this very day. The USD as the world reserve currency gave it an 'exhorbitant privilege', basically parasiting on the whole world to grow fat and rich. China on the other hand, did it the hard but more honest way

@balloonbuster 6 ай бұрын

@@iwanagohome326 You mean US does not care about face??? Silly

@tiaelago-oretukaumunika7017 6 ай бұрын

"as long as they paid tribute" is a key point. In fact, Zheng He was sent out on his journeys to militarily enforce Chinese intentions and the payment of tribute. This is exactly what he is talking about.

@SubBrief 5 ай бұрын

17:10 His 'roaming' theory is in conflict with US policy and US action. Law on the Sea, Freedom of Navigation are just two examples of US encouraging 'roaming' not limiting it.

@reubenyancey9899 6 ай бұрын

What I find striking in your plausible approach is how incredibly pointless and dangerous all this competitive activity has become. The development of competitive states may describe the death of civilization. Humans are limited by environmental conditions. This reality is ignored in your approach.

@arctic004 6 ай бұрын

Brilliant! Performance? Yes! But unquestionably brilliant.

@andrekeefer2034 6 ай бұрын

The USA should see itself as one among many, and not the one above many.

@dfdf-rj8jr 6 ай бұрын

The Imperial Germans, Nazis, Imperial Japanese, and Soviets said the same thing

@samraiter 6 ай бұрын

this lecture is from 2014? and yet it still sounds quite relevant

@jerrychao9742 6 ай бұрын

I think it is a typo, should be 2024. (posted five days ago )

@samraiter 6 ай бұрын

@@jerrychao9742 but then he talks about an impending “intifada” which kinda is what Oct 7 was, wasn’t it? He also speaks about impending Ukraine-Russia war which is happening right at this moment 🤷🏻‍♀️

@ozachar 6 ай бұрын

Somehow Mearsheimer never apply his theory to Israel, which he always derides

@Zzzk155 6 ай бұрын

He used domestic variable to explain US-Israel relation, hence neorealism not used by Mearsheimer to understand special relationship between Washington and Tel Aviv

@kooshanjazayeri 6 ай бұрын

but he does, although i'm not sure what specific thing are you looking for

@dfdf-rj8jr 6 ай бұрын

"China good, West bad" right wumao?

@dailynico 6 ай бұрын

This lecture is from 2014, 10 years ago. Why was this interesting yet very obsolete uploaded 3 weeks ago? So much has changed.

@tc-fz5qn 6 ай бұрын

JM is outing himself as a white supremacist!

@dfdf-rj8jr 6 ай бұрын

Lmao the Chinese call anyone who disagrees with them a "white supremacist"

@predragnikitz9106 5 ай бұрын

This man is a pure, pure GENIUS!!!

@Lee-Van-Cle 6 ай бұрын

Wars fit for Mearsheimear’s theory, while coups for Fukuyama’s. But both obey the Law of Instrument: When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. The neo-realism is too Hobbesian. Don’t make it a self-fulfilling prophecy. Use the brain to think of a better theory with a better human nature.

@ilcuzzo12 5 ай бұрын

Because of technological advancements, circumstances have changed. Humans are still humans. This global system is unnatural and may not last. In that case, John's right.

@ilcuzzo12 5 ай бұрын

There is no better human nature. Your utopian roots are showing.

@mathquir190 6 ай бұрын

I mean to this question I would ask another... How long did last the last historical empire ? Not less than 20, 50, 100 years. It's a new paradigm that is here for the rest of our life at least. We should adapt instead of staying into denial.

@professorwang 6 ай бұрын

He knows absolute ZERO about Taiwan. I am Taiwanese, and every single point he mentions about Taiwan is entirely wrong. We aren't "scared" of China. We are 99% ethnic Chinese; literally almost everyone has family or does business in China. Our government claims to be the government of all of China after fighting a civil war against (and losing to) the Communists; we lost because we sided with the imperialist Americans, who never actually wanted us to win but always wanted us to stay in a suspended state of war against China so they could profit. In the modern world, even we understand that our grandfathers' claim that Taiwan rules all of China is ridiculous and that we need to come to consensus how to resolve our civil war. It's our business and not the US or anyone else's.

@dr.s8972 6 ай бұрын

Get real dude. "That's not your business" isn't a valid or convincing argument in a globalized world.

@dfdf-rj8jr 5 ай бұрын

@@dr.s8972 They have been raised to hate America, there's not much you can do about it. Just wait 50 years when China is running the show in Taiwan and suddenly they will come crying, like they always do.

@CMOP-c5h 2 ай бұрын

@@dr.s8972 It is for him as it is an internal matter for Chinese to resolve and given that he is Chinese. You would not like that if people in China want to have a say in your country matters.

@charlesfeng2012 2 ай бұрын

I'm a Taiwanese too. I think you are absolutely talking out of your ass. Your view of the history and society of Taiwan is very biased. Not 99% of Taiwanese came from China. That's just not true. Go look up the statistics. Not all of Taiwanese have relatives in China or doing business with China. You are talking out of your ass. Most of Han Taiwanese family have been living in Taiwan for over 200 years. Only those Chinese who moved to Taiwan with KMT after the WWII has relatives in China. The rest of your comment is just your personal view and opinions of Taiwanese history.

@ammar6144 6 ай бұрын

I personally love the United States, but we are tired of its isolation in the world and its foreign policy, and I think that many agree with me, but at the same time the rise of China is very scary and I do not wish for a war to occur between China and America. I hope that American politicians will listen to people like Professor John so that we can avoid war as much as possible. Thanks for the rich lecture❤

@benjaminmitchell5345 6 ай бұрын

The question not whether China can rise peacefully as they proved since WW2 they have rather whether the US can recede peacefully as they have proved they cannot

@fongponto 6 ай бұрын

It seems JM's biggest influences are his mother and the bully in the (us) classroom Mother "God will help them who help themselves" : China is actually adhering to that in a peaceful way "Always be aware of the bully in the classroom": China is conducting itself in the appropriate diplomatic manner

@idofdm7625 7 ай бұрын

Even though I like John advocate realist geopolitics which China exercise, opposite of US wanting to make the whole world to America style liberal governing bodies, in someway it's successful where many countries in the world have so call democractic elections! Yet he also stress US should maintain its hegemony in Asia and should prevent China to become one even in Asia arguing unpredictability of China ambition! Seem contradictory! Realist mean nations deal with one another base on reality of individual state, for example Iran, a religious theocratic government, North Korea, hereditary dictatorship yet dealing with them as sovereign nations. But in a world where many countries are economically moving up, its just not feasible for USA to dictate the term other countries have to comply to against their own interest like economically hurt oneself for American desire to matain hegemony. American exceptionalism can only work if American can adhere to its own grandiose ideal and principal without hippocratic practices!

@mingouczjcz3800 7 ай бұрын

In core, professor Mearisheimar a dangerous extremist, rather than a realist. In rality, here is always might vs anti-minght, force vs anti-force, or action vs reaction force. But he single-mindedly preachs his type of alternative reality, “might makes rule". That's, brutal violence sets world order. The consequence is the U.S. is quickly depleting its diplomatic strength and financial resources.

@一个说话大声的中国人 7 ай бұрын

@xushenxin 6 ай бұрын

Unfortunately it is not how things work

@frankm6218 6 ай бұрын

John has very little knowledge on China, so his opinion on China is meaningless, don’t waste of your time here.

@garytan9904 6 ай бұрын

basically he is Sinophobia

@Zzzk155 6 ай бұрын

Mearsheimer doesn't pretend or try hard that he's an expert of Chinese culture or history. He's basically explain how great power politics operated according to his IR theory

@Zzzk155 6 ай бұрын

@@garytan9904 nope. He's not

@vchanpe1 6 ай бұрын

He has no clue on China. He assumes China will behave like a Western country.

@zenli2233 4 ай бұрын

@@vchanpe1 yes，In fact, Chinese people prefer to do business with you. China's thousands of years of wisdom is: war is always a losing business.

@katsukikatsunori5107 2 ай бұрын

Absolutely, I would love to make this English lecture by Professor Mia Scheimer a compulsory listening requirement for Japanese high school English. Then students would be able to look at contemporary history and international affairs from an objective perspective. まったくもって、ミアシャイマー教授によるこの英語講演を日本の高校英語の聴き取り必修にしたいくらいだよ。そうしたら、学生たちも少しは現代史と国際情勢を客観的に俯瞰できるようになるだろうに。

@BobParrIncr 7 ай бұрын

John often twists or omits facts, he reminds me of Bannon in some ways.

@jamesgo2014 7 ай бұрын

What facts he omits?

@mingouczjcz3800 7 ай бұрын

Yes, actually he's a trickist.

@一个说话大声的中国人 7 ай бұрын

@@jamesgo2014 China killed thousands of the American soldiers. China is only peaceful to some, exclude the USA. The true losers can't remember any facts. China has killed thousands of UN army soldiers already. China is the ONLY UN member that had killed thousands of UN soldiers, including thousands of the US soldiers, led by the US five-star general and superior emperor of Japan, Douglas MacArthur. John J. Mearsheimer is a true loser, and a low class one.

@yury2608 4 ай бұрын

Interstellar just tells you, “Do not go gentle into that good night,Old age should burn and rave at close of day; Rage, rage against the dying of the light.” So i guess that's the reason of recent chaos in the world?

@picnicgathering1446 7 ай бұрын

He contradicts himself while taking about Russia and China, lacking facts and being subjective on the latter, same as most westerns.

@KamranKhan-zy4qx 6 ай бұрын

Talk should have been delivered on " will US gracefully accept the new super power of international order as Britshers did after WW2"

@JohnnyBeGoood 6 ай бұрын

Power is never given, is always taken

@Nicer2BNice 6 ай бұрын

John Mearsheimer has been exactly correct about everything he’s had to say for a long time. It’s my humble opinion that he should use his theoretical framework and intellect to work on the bigger picture issues we’re going to be confronted with as a species (which all happen to be interconnected). He’s nailed the IR part of the equation. He should venture out of his comfort zone and try to tackle the other parts of the equation which all together are referred to as the metacrises.

@allau2041 5 ай бұрын

It's surreal listening him speak on the point about Israel and Ukraine after what's happened since this talk.

@eduardoboldtq.9931 6 ай бұрын

There are almost 200 military bases of USA and UK surrounding China from Japan to Malaca strait... why ??? Why all those troops, war planes, strategic bombers, submarines, strategic misils, etc, etc.

@NathansHVAC 6 ай бұрын

To protect globo ho mo

@tiaelago-oretukaumunika7017 6 ай бұрын

Containment

@jarvis9309 3 ай бұрын

To prove western hypocrisy again! 😂

@SukhdevSingh-ge5rj 6 ай бұрын

Dr. Mearshimer is really great 😃👍👍

@viswaghosh1 6 ай бұрын

Prof Mersheimer is truly brilliant. I rarely miss opportunities to listen to his lectures and interviews. On one point though, Prof Mersheimer missed out explaining, rather incorporating, "war on terror" or terrorism, in general, into his theory. Here is how I would consider incorporating "terrorism" into his theory. 1) Terrorism and terrorists will be employed by state actors to serve their interests. U.S. used and funded contra rebels in Central America. Used Osama bin Laden against USSR in Afghanistan. Used military juntas to carry out genocides across the world - Congo, Chile, East Timor. 2) "War on Terror" is a wonderful peg to hang U.S.A.'s never ending quest to produce deadlier and deadlier weapons and use them to "roam around the world". So, to conclude, "terrorism" is used as a supplement to further the state actor's goals of being a regional hegemon. And, in the case of U.S.A., to extend those hegemonic designs to the entire world.

@TuxedoTalk 5 ай бұрын

This theory reminds me of the five New York crime families. They used to war over terf constantly until Lucky Luciano convinced them to set up and respect each other's territory.

@melissasmind2846 3 ай бұрын

Much respect.

@enriquebalpstraffon 5 ай бұрын

The date should be in the title, this is 10 years old

@leewinslett2592 4 ай бұрын

Prof. Mearsheimer is a gift to America as a fantastic, thoughtful and intellectually honest public intellectual. I always enjoy his lectures. But like any set of theories on human behavior, it’s just a theory. One of the areas where his Ukraine analysis is stressed is his 4th assumption of his theory of great power politics - we can’t be certain about the intentions of Russia and Putin - which he sometimes neglects in making his argument that there is no evidence that Russia had expansionist desires. And his 5th assumption that there is no limit to what states will do to protect themselves also weakens his arguments on Ukraine - Russia has been invaded countless times in history with Ukraine being one of the superhighways along with other parts of Eastern Europe.

@paularizer 6 ай бұрын

I thought this was a new lecture but it’s a 2014 lecture uploaded in 2024, 10 years after almost to the day. Why? Better late than never? Or especially relevant right now somehow?

@PeteSchult 6 ай бұрын

Very good. From 10 years on, we can see that Israel/Palestine falls into the 25%+ he gets wrong, but he admits that his theory doesn't deal with nonstate actors or actors who have been made desperate enough to risk the "irrational"

@typon1 6 ай бұрын

Why is Reed posting this video today

@iwanagohome326 6 ай бұрын

How old is this lecture?

@Zzzk155 6 ай бұрын

@@iwanagohome326 this video recorded in 2014

@kathycollett4318 5 ай бұрын

It is even more relevant today. We are using Ukraine, Taiwan, Israel, Myanmar, etc. as proxies.

@Nauda999 6 ай бұрын

Does question "Can China Rise Peacefully?" have to do anything with USA preventing the rise of China? Wouldn't the answer to this question also depend on actions taken by USA? or is USA considered force of nature?

@federicomagnolfi5848 3 ай бұрын

The video is 10 years old

@TheRealIronMan 6 ай бұрын

The only part that aged well was the part about Russia/Ukriane, thats the part he actually had extensive knowledge on, the rest are just his dogmatic personal beliefs and projections, based mostly on an Americentric view (most scholars tend to at least try to steer away from their own culture bias and be at least somewhat objective). Since this lecture America has been involved in wars in Libya Yemen Syria Palestine Ukraine etc. while China participated exactly 0 war in the same time period, expect the same trend for the next 3 or 4 decades, Americans and their proxies love bombing other countries while demonizing the Chinese.

@thomasgarman6353 5 ай бұрын

What are you criticizing him for exactly? You brought up points that he stated himself, that china is not interested in fighting at the moment and the US is, that is exactly his point

@golinlim2221 6 ай бұрын

EVERYONE Should rise peacefully (in their Right mind)!!

@starfish253 6 ай бұрын

Why should the US be free to roam, but not other regional hegemons? Very one-sided

@ottodetroit 5 ай бұрын

thank god this guy is not an elected official or federal government decision maker. Pray he keeps his day job forever.

@TheVafa95 6 ай бұрын

When was the talk given?

@wenwu2937 5 ай бұрын

This reminds me of the Black Forest Theory

@abrambadal8997 5 ай бұрын

On starting to lay out his theory , he says we are not sure of future behavior of China ! Whereas we know historically thinking China is among the most peaceful nation in the past 4 to 500 years in the world and even more ! And we know how Today's China how it has reacted to our hegemonic warrior behavior ( of USA ) , when attacking Korea , China stepped in and stopped our complete conquest of Korea in 1952 , then we tried with Vietnam , and got a bloody nose and had to escape and withdraw completely in 1975 after 4 years of intense genocidal bombing and fighting ! Then we tried to get in the backdoor of China from Afghanistan's side , there even after two wars and second lasting over 20 years we had to withdraw abruptly and leaving billions of dollars of war materials and technologies ! So we know now with China , starting to aid Chiang KaySchek we lost , Korea , no success , Vietnam Loss , twice Afghanistan total loss , who , except a crazy person would think that USA against China will win over Taiwan or else ???? No need to theorize here you can look at history and say USA will certainly loose now , deeply in Debt and lots of people in USA against Permanent Wars' doctrine today in 2024 !

@staher841 6 ай бұрын

This lecture is from 2014. Someone should show this video to Mearsheimer and ask him if his opinion changed on anything he said here... Especially when he said Russia and Ukraine confrontation is not much of a hot spot likely to cause WW3.

@homo-sapein8091 6 ай бұрын

Small Correction: If a country is on the rise (China, India, Southeast Asia) Politics trumps Economics, but if it (America, E.U) is in decline, then Tribal-Ethnocentrism trumps economics.

@nawafdreams 6 ай бұрын

🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation ****00:00** - **02:19** 🇨🇳 Can China Rise Peacefully?** * Discusses two central questions surrounding China's rise: its future trajectory and the possibility of a peaceful ascent. * Highlights the speaker's agnostic view on whether China's rise will persist due to differing opinions from experts. * Emphasizes the importance of the second question - can China rise peacefully - as it holds significant implications for the US, China's neighbors, and China itself. * Stresses the need for a theoretical framework to analyze China's rise, as predicting the future relies on understanding the past and present. * Dismisses anecdotal evidence from meetings, as those individuals may not be relevant in the future. * Argues that a robust theory of great power politics, capable of explaining historical and current events, is essential for predicting China's future trajectory. ****02:19** - **05:07** 📚 Predicting the Future with Theory** * Outlines five assumptions about the international system that form the basis of his theory. * States are the primary actors in an anarchic system. * All states possess some degree of offensive military capability. * States are rational actors who prioritize their own survival and security. * The international system is characterized by a lack of trust and a constant fear of other states' actions. * States are constantly seeking to maximize their power and influence in order to ensure their survival. ****05:07** - **07:09** 🌎 Five Assumptions of Great Power Politics** * Emphasizes the difficulty in discerning the true intentions of states due to their intangible nature. * Compares it to the challenge of predicting behavior in a marriage, drawing a parallel to divorce rates. * Concludes that while current intentions might be somewhat decipherable, future intentions remain uncertain, highlighting the inherent unpredictability of states' actions. ****07:09** - **10:39** 🤔 The Intricacies of Intentions** * Details the three primary behaviors of states stemming from the five assumptions. * States inherently fear each other because of potential threats posed by offensive capabilities and uncertain intentions. * They prioritize self-help and self-preservation due to the lack of a higher authority in the anarchic international system. * States strive to become the most powerful in their region - a regional hegemon - to ensure survival by deterring aggression. * Cites the United States as a prime example, highlighting its dominance in the Western Hemisphere. * Introduces the concept of "freedom to roam" where a regional hegemon, free from significant threats in its own region, can intervene globally. ****10:39** - **17:32** 🐺 Survival, Self-Help, and the Quest for Power** * Examines American foreign policy from 1783 to the present, arguing that it aligns with the theory of great power politics. * Describes the US's expansion across North America through Manifest Destiny and the removal of European powers from the Western Hemisphere via the Monroe Doctrine. * Cites the US's role in defeating potential peer competitors like Germany and Japan in the 20th century as evidence of its hegemonic ambitions. * Applies the theory to China, suggesting its likely pursuit of regional hegemony in Asia as it grows in power. * Draws parallels to China's "century of national humiliation" and the desire to never be weak again. * Predicts China's ambition to push the US out of East Asia, similar to the US's enforcement of the Monroe Doctrine. ****17:32** - **22:37** 🦅 American Foreign Policy: A History of Hegemony** * Explores the conflicting interests of a peacefully rising China seeking regional hegemony and a threatened United States determined to contain it. * Argues China benefits from a slow, peaceful rise, as time favors its growing power, while the US, perceiving a future threat, is incentivized to act sooner. * Highlights the emerging balancing coalition of countries like Japan, India, and Vietnam, driven by concerns over China's growing power. * Introduces the security dilemma, where actions perceived as defensive by one nation are seen as offensive by another, using the US "pivot to Asia" as an example. * Explains how China's defensive military buildup in response to regional anxieties is interpreted by the US as further evidence of aggressive intentions. * Warns that this cycle fuels an arms race and increases the risk of conflict, comparing it to the dangers of the Cold War. ****22:37** - **29:01** 🌏 China's Rise: Mirroring the Hegemon?** * Acknowledges the inherent limitations of social science theories and the possibility of his own theory being wrong in 25% of cases. * Expresses hope that the rise of China falls within that 25%, leading to a peaceful outcome despite the bleak predictions. * Acknowledges the counterargument that economic interdependence between the US and China makes war unlikely, but argues that politics often outweighs economics in crises. * Provides further examples, such as Taiwan, the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands dispute, and the Ukraine crisis, to illustrate how political considerations can override economic interests. * Uses China's stance on Taiwan's independence to emphasize that political imperatives, even if economically damaging, can drive actions. * Cites the potential for nationalism to ignite conflict over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands, demonstrating that political calculations often supersede economic logic. ****29:01** - **32:13** 🚧 China's Peaceful Rise vs. US Containment** * Addresses questions about the role of terrorist organizations and states acting irrationally within his theory. * Acknowledges that his state-centric theory doesn't directly address non-state actors like terrorist groups, viewing them as less significant threats. * Concedes that the assumption of states as rational actors is not always accurate, which explains why his theory has limitations. * Expresses uncertainty about the future trajectory of China's economic growth, citing differing opinions among experts. * Highlights the inherent danger for Taiwan if China's economy continues to grow, as it increases the likelihood of China asserting control over the island. * Reiterates that even with economic interdependence, the uncertainty about China's future intentions makes its growing power a concern. ****32:13** - **41:28** ⚔ The Security Dilemma in US-China Relations** * Acknowledges the counterargument that many powerful nations throughout history overextended themselves and ultimately collapsed. * Admits the US is the only country to successfully maintain hegemonic status for an extended period and enjoyed unique geographical advantages. * Prepares to further discuss the specific historical context of the US and how it managed to avoid the pitfalls of overreach. * Explores counterarguments to his theory, acknowledging that many historical great powers ultimately overreached and collapsed. * Highlights the uniqueness of the US in achieving sustained hegemony due to its geographical isolation and late emergence as a great power. * Concedes that rational states, aware of these historical patterns, might choose a more cautious approach to expansion. ****41:28** - **44:15** 🔬 The Limits of Theory and the Hope for Peace** * Expresses hope that China will recognize the limits of its power and not risk war with the US and its allies, but acknowledges the potential for miscalculations. * Predicts that China will constantly probe for opportunities to expand its influence, which creates inherent risks of conflict. * Raises concerns about the lack of a clear "central front" in Asia, making limited wars more likely than during the Cold War in Europe. * Addresses a question about whether economic expansion, rather than territorial conquest, could trigger conflict with China. * Points out that China, unlike the early US, already possesses vast territory and has fewer incentives for large-scale territorial expansion. * Acknowledges China's existing territorial disputes but suggests it might prefer to resolve them through economic and military strength rather than war. Made with HARPA AI

@nawafdreams 6 ай бұрын

****44:15** - **51:09** 💰 Economics vs. Politics: Taiwan, Islands, and Ukraine** * Discusses the role of international institutions like the UN and international law, arguing they hold limited sway over great power competition. * Highlights the UN Security Council's veto power, rendering it ineffective when major powers disagree. * Cites examples like the US interventions in Kosovo and Iraq, conducted without UN authorization, to demonstrate that powerful states often ignore international law when it conflicts with their interests. * Assesses the potential for various global hotspots, focusing on whether they could ignite a wider conflict. * Downplays the risk of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict escalating into a major war due to Israel's military superiority and US support. * Similarly, views a potential conflict in Ukraine as contained, unlikely to draw in NATO directly. * Identifies Asia, particularly the South China Sea, the East China Sea, and the Korean Peninsula, as the most volatile regions with a higher likelihood of US-China conflict. ****51:09** - **56:02** 🌐 Non-State Actors and the Rationality Assumption** * Discusses the likely intensity and destructiveness of potential conflicts in Asia. * Believes that the presence of nuclear weapons makes a full-scale, uncontrolled war unlikely due to the fear of mutually assured destruction. * Suggests that limited wars are more probable but must be carefully managed to prevent inadvertent escalation. * Cites the work of Barry Posen and the dangers of conventional conflicts inadvertently spiraling into nuclear war. * Addresses a question about whether nationalism, as a potentially irrational force, could increase the risk of war. * Discusses the case of Ukraine giving up its nuclear arsenal after the collapse of the Soviet Union. * Argues that Ukraine made a grave error in relinquishing its nuclear weapons, as they would have deterred Russian aggression. * Believes the US exerted undue pressure on Ukraine to disarm, including offering security guarantees that proved unreliable. ****56:02** - **01:00:04** 🗺 China's Territorial Disputes: Limited and Manageable?** * Analyzes the role of nationalism in Chinese politics and society. * Suggests that the Chinese Communist Party increasingly relies on nationalism for legitimacy as communism loses its ideological appeal. * Points to the "century of national humiliation" as a central theme in Chinese nationalism, shaping its perception of the US and Japan as historical adversaries. * Explores how nationalism, fueled by the "century of humiliation," limits the Chinese leadership's flexibility in crises. * Argues that the Communist Party's reliance on nationalism for legitimacy makes it difficult to back down in disputes with Japan and the US. * Notes that Chinese scholars, typically more optimistic, expressed heightened concern over the risks of nationalist sentiment during his visit to Beijing. ****01:00:04** - **01:03:42** 💣 Nationalism and the Ukraine's Nuclear Disarmament** * Examines China's growing need to secure resources like oil, food, and raw materials from beyond its borders. * Highlights China's increasing dependence on oil from the Persian Gulf and its expanding economic ties with Africa and South America. * Predicts a global expansion of the US-China security competition as China seeks to protect its access to these resources and secure its supply lines. * Discusses China's development of a blue-water navy to protect its global interests and secure its sea lanes. * Compares China's situation to the US, which built a powerful navy to protect its global interests and project power worldwide. * Predicts that China will increasingly resemble a "superpower," in the mold of the US and Soviet Union, as it develops the capability to project military force beyond its region. ****01:03:42** - **01:11:20** 🇨🇳 Nationalism as a Driving Force in China** * Discusses the role of international institutions like the UN and international law, arguing they hold limited sway over great power competition. * Highlights the UN Security Council's veto power, rendering it ineffective when major powers disagree. * Cites examples like the US interventions in Kosovo and Iraq, conducted without UN authorization, to demonstrate that powerful states often ignore international law when it conflicts with their interests. * Assesses the potential for various global hotspots, focusing on whether they could ignite a wider conflict. * Downplays the risk of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict escalating into a major war due to Israel's military superiority and US support. * Similarly, views a potential conflict in Ukraine as contained, unlikely to draw in NATO directly. * Identifies Asia, particularly the South China Sea, the East China Sea, and the Korean Peninsula, as the most volatile regions with a higher likelihood of US-China conflict.

@nawafdreams 6 ай бұрын

****01:11:20** - **01:14:09** 🌐 Global Hotspots: Asia vs. Other Regions** * Discusses the likely intensity and destructiveness of potential conflicts in Asia. * Believes that the presence of nuclear weapons makes a full-scale, uncontrolled war unlikely due to the fear of mutually assured destruction. * Suggests that limited wars are more probable but must be carefully managed to prevent inadvertent escalation. * Cites the work of Barry Posen and the dangers of conventional conflicts inadvertently spiraling into nuclear war. * Addresses a question about whether nationalism, as a potentially irrational force, could increase the risk of war. * Discusses the case of Ukraine giving up its nuclear arsenal after the collapse of the Soviet Union. * Argues that Ukraine made a grave error in relinquishing its nuclear weapons, as they would have deterred Russian aggression. * Believes the US exerted undue pressure on Ukraine to disarm, including offering security guarantees that proved unreliable. ****01:14:09** - **01:16:25** ☢ The Intensity and Destructiveness of Potential Conflicts** * Analyzes the role of nationalism in Chinese politics and society. * Suggests that the Chinese Communist Party increasingly relies on nationalism for legitimacy as communism loses its ideological appeal. * Points to the "century of national humiliation" as a central theme in Chinese nationalism, shaping its perception of the US and Japan as historical adversaries. * Explores how nationalism, fueled by the "century of humiliation," limits the Chinese leadership's flexibility in crises. * Argues that the Communist Party's reliance on nationalism for legitimacy makes it difficult to back down in disputes with Japan and the US. * Notes that Chinese scholars, typically more optimistic, expressed heightened concern over the risks of nationalist sentiment during his visit to Beijing. ****01:16:25** - **01:19:33** 💥 Nationalism: A Constraint on China's Behavior** * Examines China's growing need to secure resources like oil, food, and raw materials from beyond its borders. * Highlights China's increasing dependence on oil from the Persian Gulf and its expanding economic ties with Africa and South America. * Predicts a global expansion of the US-China security competition as China seeks to protect its access to these resources and secure its supply lines. * Discusses China's development of a blue-water navy to protect its global interests and secure its sea lanes. * Compares China's situation to the US, which built a powerful navy to protect its global interests and project power worldwide. * Predicts that China will increasingly resemble a "superpower," in the mold of the US and Soviet Union, as it develops the capability to project military force beyond its region. ****01:19:33** - **01:22:46** 🌾 China's Global Resource Strategy** * Discusses the role of international institutions like the UN and international law, arguing they hold limited sway over great power competition. * Highlights the UN Security Council's veto power, rendering it ineffective when major powers disagree. * Cites examples like the US interventions in Kosovo and Iraq, conducted without UN authorization, to demonstrate that powerful states often ignore international law when it conflicts with their interests. * Assesses the potential for various global hotspots, focusing on whether they could ignite a wider conflict. * Downplays the risk of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict escalating into a major war due to Israel's military superiority and US support. * Similarly, views a potential conflict in Ukraine as contained, unlikely to draw in NATO directly. * Identifies Asia, particularly the South China Sea, the East China Sea, and the Korean Peninsula, as the most volatile regions with a higher likelihood of US-China conflict. ****01:22:46** - **01:24:50** ⚓ China's Naval Ambitions and Global Power Projection** * Discusses the likely intensity and destructiveness of potential conflicts in Asia. * Believes that the presence of nuclear weapons makes a full-scale, uncontrolled war unlikely due to the fear of mutually assured destruction. * Suggests that limited wars are more probable but must be carefully managed to prevent inadvertent escalation. * Cites the work of Barry Posen and the dangers of conventional conflicts inadvertently spiraling into nuclear war. * Addresses a question about whether nationalism, as a potentially irrational force, could increase the risk of war. * Discusses the case of Ukraine giving up its nuclear arsenal after the collapse of the Soviet Union. * Argues that Ukraine made a grave error in relinquishing its nuclear weapons, as they would have deterred Russian aggression. * Believes the US exerted undue pressure on Ukraine to disarm, including offering security guarantees that proved unreliable. ****01:24:50** - **01:27:30** 🌐 Global Hotspots: Asia vs. Other Regions** * Analyzes the role of nationalism in Chinese politics and society. * Suggests that the Chinese Communist Party increasingly relies on nationalism for legitimacy as communism loses its ideological appeal. * Points to the "century of national humiliation" as a central theme in Chinese nationalism, shaping its perception of the US and Japan as historical adversaries. * Explores how nationalism, fueled by the "century of humiliation," limits the Chinese leadership's flexibility in crises. * Argues that the Communist Party's reliance on nationalism for legitimacy makes it difficult to back down in disputes with Japan and the US. * Notes that Chinese scholars, typically more optimistic, expressed heightened concern over the risks of nationalist sentiment during his visit to Beijing. ****01:27:30** - **01:30:20** 💥 Nationalism: A Constraint on China's Behavior** * Examines China's growing need to secure resources like oil, food, and raw materials from beyond its borders. * Highlights China's increasing dependence on oil from the Persian Gulf and its expanding economic ties with Africa and South America. * Predicts a global expansion of the US-China security competition as China seeks to protect its access to these resources and secure its supply lines. * Discusses China's development of a blue-water navy to protect its global interests and secure its sea lanes. * Compares China's situation to the US, which built a powerful navy to protect its global interests and project power

@nkonghoryan6493 6 ай бұрын

To think the students following this lecture, once they get to power, will pursue the very same polycies driven by the current leaders . There is no hope.

@joeyklein9897 6 ай бұрын

I think Dr. Mearsheimer does not read Chinese classic philosophy about how to govern the world: It is not hegemony but Justice, i.e. everyone gets his/her deserved reward based on his / her contribution.

@orange1832 6 ай бұрын

As far I know the nukes technically were in Ukraine, but the actual control over them belonged to Russia anyway.

@churblefurbles 6 ай бұрын

It would be foolish for Taiwan to trust the US.

@billhammett174 6 ай бұрын

Ukraine calling 911 ------- Hello, USA here, how can we help you? Israel calling 911 ----------- Hello, USA here, how can we help you? Kudos to Reed College for sponsoring Prof M....

@ayushraj6897 2 ай бұрын

Worst possible camera angle they could have

@rationalthinker2200 6 ай бұрын

The Chinese through sheer hard work have brought 800 million of its population from abject poverty to near middle class within the last 3 to 4 decades is unprecedented in the world. Look at every major Economic parameters from Health span,mortality rate, home ownership,car ownership,internet penetration,education levels..etc etc it is the fastest progress the world has ever seen. This was archieved without a war..a invasion..a regime change ..a colonization spree..or plundering of other natives resources etc..How on Earth can this not be classified as the most Peacefull rise of a Nation ever.. Look at " Great: Britain how many colonies did it Ravished..France..Spain and even US on the number of Fertile Territories from Texas to Carlifornia it took from Mexico ..etc ( The Mexicans are returning the favour by coming back to resettle it😢) Of Course the Speaker here is not into the morality question but just Real politics ..US just wants to be the no 1 Dorminant Power of the world ..and will do its utmost to supress any upcoming power .. US and the West fears that the next non West Dorminant Power will BEHAVE just like them.. But don t worry the Chinese DNA through their 4 000 years history has shown that they are non Evangelistic and For "God King and Country " Colonizing methodology but a more The Prosperity Gospel stream..😊.. Ie Prosper thy neighbour so that in turn thy neigbour will buy more stuff from China and prosper China even further...😂