5 January, 18:59
Everything flows, everything changes, yet the Sun, as it has for millions of years, rises in the East and sets in the West. This immutable reality continues to trouble many restless minds—or rather, those seeking to assert their importance and emphasize the immense contributions and unparalleled results of the “wise leadership” of their benefactors, upon whom their status and prosperity depend.
Let’s be honest: this approach is far from new. Even a thousand years ago, philosophers went cap in hand to the wealthy, singing praises of their intellect, beauty, and, of course, their greatest virtue—money.
This echoes in the context of statements made by Chinese scholars at an academic forum held at the Shenzhen campus of the Chinese University of Hong Kong. The forum discussed a concept proposed by Chinese authorities: "The East rises while the West declines." On the surface, this statement has its merits.
Yang Jiemian, chairman of the academic council of the Shanghai Institute for International Studies, remarked that the world is undergoing irreversible changes, moving away from the dominance of the West over the past 500 years. However, he noted, completing this process could take centuries.
"The reality is: the East is weak, and the West is strong," he added.
At first glance, his words contradict the earlier statement, but in truth, they do not. He is also correct.
The issue is not that the idea of the East rising and the West declining is contradicted by the observation of a strong West and a weak East. Nor is it about witnessing the decline of the West-centric world order, or that its time has not yet come.
No, the problem lies elsewhere: we misunderstand the roles of the East and West in the global system.
The West will always be in the west, and the East in the east.
Despite witnessing the Sun rise in the East and set in the West every day, we stubbornly refuse to grasp that this is an eternal cycle.
A cycle in which the East, though weak, carries the seeds of growth. It is like a child—taking its first steps, growing, developing, reaching its peak, and eventually passing its legacy to the older West, which, in turn, continues to live but in a state of decline.
Yes, the East rises like a young organism, while the West declines like a weary elder. This is a natural cycle, one we cannot cancel, change, or bypass. It is the path every civilization walks.
But this explanation is uninteresting to thinkers in their “laboratories of meaning.” They portray China as the leading force of the East, destined in a few hundred years to become an independent global center of influence, free from the West.
The reasons for this prediction lie in both technological and ideological breakthroughs. But here’s the catch: China has yet to offer the world a global idea capable of competing with the Western model of globalization.
Even more intriguingly, China remains under the influence of Western communist ideology, which, while adapted to its specifics, still rests on Western principles.
But does the East need to transform into the West?
Should it forsake its natural advantages—geography, historical role, and youthful vitality?
The point is not that “the moment has not yet come,” but that the young and vigorous East is the life-giving energy that nourishes the aging West. The West, in turn, shares its technologies and wisdom, as this is the only way to maintain balance.
This is not merely a civilizational path; it is a natural cycle, a part of the global ecosystem.