THE END OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION WITH THE INVASION OF THE EAST

ICLTIBM 2019

9^th International Conference on Leadership, Technology, Innovation and Business Management: Leadership, Innovation, Media and Communication

THE END OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION WITH THE INVASION OF THE EAST

Maria Negreponti-Delivanis  

Macedonia University, 156 Egnatia Street, Thessaloniki, Greece

Abstract

Numerous indicators point to the end of Western civilization. Global governance, along with liberalism, had been taken over by the US after World War II, with the addition of globalization during the last 50 years. Despite being America's choice, globalization, has largely favored China in achieving rapid growth rates, and in less than 40 years threatening the US supremacy. In many crucial sectors America is no longer the "first". The greatest risk to the US, however, lies in China's concerted efforts, with the help of Russia and other economies, to replace the dollar as a global savings currency. China, besides being surrounded by numerous economies in Asia, Africa and Europe, is launching a new globalization, reviving the old silk road and providing its products to the world, while at the same time contributing to the development of the less advanced economies. Predictably, in a few short years from now China will have taken over the position of the US, as world ruler. The big question is whether the US will accept this change in leadership or whether, on the contrary, the Thucydides trap which caused the Peloponesian War shall be verified.

Keywords: Dedollarization, End of western civilization, New economic order, New silk road, Thucydides trap

1.       Introduction

There are numerous indications, not to say evidence, pointing to the conclusion that the global economy is at a crossroad towards catalytic changes. Changes that occur approximately every 200 years, in the form of radical upheavals. "The old world is dying, the new one is slow to emerge and the monsters are invading this twilight" (Gramsci). The global economy paints a picture of chaos, in which nothing works in the way we knew. All those marvelous promises that imposed and welcomed globalization, from one end of the globe to the other, are miserably failing. Ultimately, globalization was not the system that would ensure prosperity for all the inhabitants of the earth, but the system that recorded few winners and countless losers. Globalization is probably the last stage of "Western capitalism", but also the system that accelerated its end.

The West especially, during the last five or so decades, has been increasingly entering largely uncharted waters. All that is well-known, safe and traditional recedes at a dizzying speed and is being replaced by the unknown, subversive and threatening. Western civilization seems to have exhausted the time historically available for the life of each civilization, and is now called upon to surrender its sovereignty to its successor. In particular, the West seems to have entered the unprecedented and inevitable stage of capitalism that we are currently witnessing and is threatening advanced economies with permanent stagnation and the end of growth (Hansen, Summers). The main feature of perpetual stagnation in modern advanced economies is the long-term inability to balance savings and investment, in the form of surplus savings, which cannot be equated to permanent under-investment. The advanced centers of "western culture" are already presenting a clear picture of the general decline prevailing in all facets of social, economic, and cultural life. According to all indications, this is the herald of the end for the Western civilization, as for all those which preceded it and followed the same prescribed path. Civilizations emerge, prevail and die.

However, the end of each era is accompanied by the rise of another, through which a new culture emerges replacing the one whose end has come. In the past, Western civilization was born through the ashes of the ancient Greek culture, with the successive emergence, from 1860 onwards, of the dominant economic centers of Australia, Great Britain, and the United States. At this stage of capitalist development, our civilization, the Western one, which has been co-existing with democracy, capitalism, liberalism and during the last 50 years with globalization, is being marginalized. One cannot doubt the fact that, in recent decades Western culture is gradually losing its glamor, no longer attracting but on the contrary being abandoned by its proponents.

But how does one ascertain the decline of civilizations? Obviously, over time, fatigue saturates the individual elements constituting a civilization, highlighting the difficulty of maintaining their cohesion, reinforcing their progressive inability of successfully responding to internal and external stimuli, stressing the adverse effects of cumulative trends towards the adoption of unsuccessful economic policy measures, and revealing the gradual loss of temperance in the decisions and actions of officials and citizens.

In Part 1 of my article I will highlight the invasion of China which, according to all indications, will be sitting on top of the world in about ten years from now, thus displacing the US and bringing on a new international economic order, while in Part 2 I will turn to the implications which the latter is expected to have on the various aspects of life on our planet.

2.       Good Night West-Good Morning East

Since the end of World War II, and until recently, Western domination, capped by the US, was unquestionable, with the prevailing belief that there would never be a rival in all eternity (Fukuyama 1989). This certainty however, was ruthlessly crushed, forcing Francis Fukuyama to make the following statement: "China is the biggest challenge in telling the “end of history”, as it has been modernized financially while remaining a dictatorship (...). If in the years to come, its growth continues and if it maintains its position as the largest economic power in the world, I will admit that my view was definitely wrong ”(Fukuyama, 2018).

Indeed, all developments, analyses and statistics indicate that the West will soon be forced to hand over the keys of its long-standing reign to China, the new, and rapidly rising superpower. This new dominant power of the world is expected to gradually gain the support of other emerging economies in Asia, Africa, Latin America and Europe, and the Balkans in particular. China's huge undertaking, known as the New Silk Road, is attracting an ever-growing number of mostly emerging economies around it, as a metropolis, with the latest acquisition of El Salvador, a fact which is enraging the US, being in their neighborhood (Londono).

Although globalization was America's choice, it was ultimately China that benefited from it. America, for a long time, did not realize that the great danger for it was well hidden under the poor and marginalized giant of China at the time.

2.1. China's leaps gradually marginalize the West

I will now present certain key facts about how fast the Chinese economy is moving and how seemingly painlessly it will surpass the US in the role of world sovereign, and much faster than originally anticipated:

Table 01. GDP growth of the two major economies, America and China, from 2016 and forecasted to 2040 (assuming that America will achieve an annual growth rate of 2.0% while China, respectively, of 6.5%)

GDP	2016	2018	2025	2028	2033	2040
America	$18.6T	$19.4T	$22.3T	$23.6T	$26.1T	$30.0T
China	$11.2T	$12.7T	$19.8T	$23.9T	$32.8T	$50.0T

Source: Malcolm Scott and Cedric Sam (2017) "Here’s How Fast China’s Economy Is Catching Up to the U.S. (Smith)

Published: May 12, 2016 Updated: November 06, 2017

However, the calculations in Table 1 do not accurately reflect the size of GDP and its differences between the two superpowers because they do not take into account their significant purchasing power differences. E.g. a burger costs 1.8 times more in the US than in China. Adjusting the GDP figures for these two economies, on the basis of this difference shows that, as of 2016, China's GDP exceeds that of the US, as follows: China $ 21T and US $ 18.5T.

The data in Table 2, below, complement the US and China’s economic profile as projected for 2025.

Table 02. Basic data for the two superpowers as projected for the year 2025

	USA	CHINA
Population	320 million	1,385 million
FDI $*	287,16 billion	347,85 billion
Internet	836 million	189 million
Annual growth rate	2.4%	7.4%
Exports	2.34T	2.34T
Imports	2.85T	1.96T
Public Revenue	2.7T	2.11T
GDP per capita $	54,629.5	7,593.9
Tourism
Number of international visitors	69,768 million	55,686 million
Average wage
2013	44,888$	14,600$

*Foreign Direct Investment

Source: Ruchir Sharma (2017) "Slow growth can only help China", International New York Times, 26/10

China is running very fast and alone accounts for 39% of world GDP growth in 2016. However, as Table 2 shows, even with PPP per capita income estimates of the two economies (1), China's is still only 1/3 of its US counterpart.

The US economy continues to represent the largest part of the world economy in 2016: 24.7% versus 14.9% for China. However, this percentage for America is steadily declining, as it represented around 50% at the end of World War II, and only 15.1% today, while it is projected to decline further to 13.7% by 2023, respectively.

On the other hand, China is on its part steadily forging ahead and we should already note that America is no longer "First" in several crucial fields. In fact, this explains the persistent and cumulative accusations of the West (mainly the US) against China. China has been accused of a series of "misconducts" such as sponsoring its public companies, being undemocratic, stealing technologies from its competitors, artificially keeping the external value of the yuan low to encourage exports, not respecting intellectual property laws, using the Chinese diaspora (most recently in Australia) as spies, etc.

But even greater than the threat to the US, fueled by China's economic and technological developments, is the one that endangers the monopoly of the dollar as a global reserve currency (Engdahl). Indeed, China is stepping up its program, aiming at de-dollarization, with the support of other allies / emerging countries.  Russia's presence is particularly important to that end  (Durden), as it is the world's largest oil producer and already the main source of oil for China. In order to reduce risks in their trading and to boost trade between them, these two strong emerging economies established a PVP for the yuan and the ruble in October 2017. Next, they are planning to extend this payment system to other countries participating in the "Silk Road". It is the first time that the PVP system has been launched, for transactions in yuan and foreign currencies, and it is obviously aimed at limiting risks as it allows for the simultaneous settlement of transactions in two different currencies. This new, alternative international monetary system is already partially operational with the introduction on the international market of crude oil long-term futures contracts priced in gold convertible yuan. The plan envisages that China, the world's largest oil importer, will cease paying for it in dollars in the near future, but will acquire it in yuan. As the Chinese currency, in this case, is expected to be convertible to gold, there will in principle be no reason for the oil-producing countries to refuse acceptance. Then, once China proves beyond doubt its economic euphoria and hegemony in the world, the conversion of the yuan to gold will become superfluous.   It is obvious that these initiatives threaten the international dominance of the US currency and are intended to force the West, rather soon apparently, to hand over the keys to its long-standing global monetary dominance to China. To China, who does not stand alone on the international stage, but is strongly supported by Russia, and flanked by the BRICS countries (2). Let me add that, China and its allies in the "new silk road" are considering  the possibility of creating a common currency, possibly based on the experience of the euro (Negreponti-Delivanis 2018, Part II, E).

When this new giant system of economic and monetary power is dynamically launched, it will be very difficult for the US and all the advanced western economies not to be definitely marginalized. Needless to say, this new system is directly linked to the financing needs of the "new silk road".

2.2. What is the treatment of the superpower expected to be?

America's only response, for the moment, is simply reverting to the past, once more with the adoption of protectionism, although with unclear and ever-changing rules. Donald Trump seems to believe that the measures he occasionally proclaims, aimed primarily at slowing growth and in particular China's new technologies, will be enough to realize the vision he likes to put forward with every opportunity, that is, "America First", which indirectly includes "China Second". However, although international developments are difficult to predict accurately, there are many reasons why the success of this objective seems extremely unlikely, if not impossible. First, because the size of China's economy already exceeds that of the US, in many respects, and nothing seems capable of stalling the completion of its supremacy on all key levels of comparison with the superpower that preceded it. Second, China's special form of globalization will be totally different from the western one that is bidding us goodbye. This globalization bearing the colors of China, threatens to sweep everything in its path. Thirdly moreover, China is unlikely to be substantially affected by Donald Trump's decisions against it, having already entered the stage of boosting domestic consumption accompanied by an unavoidable reduction of its dependency on exports, as well as feverishly pursuing its grand scheme of the new "Silk Road". After all, the multifaceted war between America and China, officially recognized as commercial, is essentially a high-tech war. In particular, America has realized, albeit with great delay, China's superiority, not only in robotics, but also in the many hubs of 5G technology.

On the other hand, China lists its goals for the future, based on a serious, well-thought out plan, and has recently stated (Cohen) that in 2035 she "will be the world’s No1 in new technologies", and in 2050 "the No1 power ensuring prosperity for all" (3).

Obviously, the thorny question from the answer to which depends our survival on our planet is precisely how America will react to the growing threat of losing its global primacy.

The first, albeit unlikely possibility is America's haughty optimism that there is no serious threat of its being marginalized by China, that various solutions such as protectionist measures on imports, non-signing or withdrawal from international trade agreements and trying to reduce the pace of Chinese growth will eliminate the risk. They will not however, because China's prevalence in almost all modern and crucial economic sectors is either already a fact or the necessary foundations have been led for the near future.

The second and more scary possibility refers to the US decision not to accept its global crowding out from China, and therefore to use every possible means to prevent it. In the face of such a devastating prospect for the West, there is obviously always an outlet for the intentions of the superpower, which is simply recourse to war. While China clearly does not want to embark on such an adventure that will delay and perhaps frustrate its detailed plans for the future, such a tragic global development cannot unfortunately be ruled out.

The risk of conflict arises following China’s Communist Congress and Xi Jinping's entry into his second term. China highlights its intention, as well as its potential to become the world's first economy, by relegating the US to second place. This is precisely when  it becomes clear that America is not prepared to give China the throne which it has been steadily holding onto for decades and officially recognizes China as its economic enemy (Swanson). Relations between the two superpowers, currently swirling in the midst of an escalating trade war, seem increasingly difficult to avoid the well-known Thucydides' dilemma (or trap), which explains the causes of the Peloponnesian War. The thoughts triggered even today by this "dilemma" are considered more timely than ever, since they are projected two and a half thousand years forward in the US-China relations. It is well known that the Peloponnesian War in ancient Greece was caused by Athens' refusal to cede part of its power to the emerging Sparta, for fear of losing its privileges. Thucydides 'dilemma' is seriously troubling Donald Trump's staff.  Graham Allison, in particular, a professor of international politics at Harvard, recently spoke at the White House's National Security Council about how a war between the two superpowers could be avoided, based on his own article which is in turn based on concerns about the Peloponnesian War (Allison).

How probable is a conflict between the US and China? For the time being, according to all indications, a military conflict between the US and China seems to be avoided because neither of the two superpowers wants it. The same however does not apply as far as the eruption of a trade war is concerned, which is increasingly intensifying and putting globalization in the past. The reluctance of the two superpowers, the US and China, to enter a war between them at this stage, disputes Graham Allison's certainty that there is, in all cases, a "Thucydides trap".

What is by no means certain however is how this rivalry between the two superpowers will evolve over a longer period, and unfortunately the threat of a global conflict with the use of nuclear weapons is heightened, following the US President's recent statement that he will withdraw from the Medium Range Nuclear weapons Treaty signed with Russia, in 1987, for their elimination. Donald Trump justifies his decision on the basis of "Russia breaching the terms of the Treaty". The real reason underlying this decision however, lies in the following additional cause which is frightening in itself. Donald Trump stressed "the need for the US to deploy its military equipment" (Pentapostagma). On its part, China is not lagging behind, but has also started to modernize its military machine (Lind). A particular although justified concern for the West was China's stance, on the occasion of the grand military parade in Beijing for the commemoration of the 70th anniversary of its communist system. This is because there is a lot of evidence in favor of China potentially reverting to the "threat theory" (Wong).

America's greatest concern, which is understandable, is first and foremost in the field of new technologies, where according to numerous indications, China is ahead. Based on a 2017 report by a special congressional committee on inter-state relations (4), it appears that Chinese investments in the US were strategically focused on information and communication technologies, agriculture, and biotechnology. The US administration is now directly accusing the Chinese of stealing its technology and exploiting the hitherto freedoms of investing in America, while imposing numerous restrictions on their own territory as to the acceptance of US investments. According to research findings, this intellectual theft of China has cost the US $ 1 trillion. America's goal is to block Chinese high-tech investment and force China to change its policy, in particular not to "steal" American technology. Specifically, Donald Trump's intention appears to be to isolate China and now openly pursuing a series of measures that are overtly directed against her. These include, among others, America reverting to preferring bilateral trade agreements with its traditional partners, including banning further agreements with China, like the recent US-Canada-Mexico (Rappeport) agreement. Talks are also planned seemingly directed at tightening America's relations with the EU, Japan, Britain, the Philippines, Vietnam, etc., with the aim of keeping China apart and on the grounds that it does not comply with the terms of free trade. However, these measures against China, in addition to being too late, are extremely unlikely to lead to the results expected by America. They are measures of despair that fail to stall the Chinese torrent. That is why nothing in the long run precludes a war conflict between the two superpowers.

3.       The New World

One of the major problems that the West should already be concerned with is whether China will be content with conquering world economic sovereignty, or if it will instead seek to impose its own cultural values on the globe, which are quite different from their respective western counterparts.  Indeed, China, with Xi Jinping in his second term as its leader, is currently abandoning its earlier approach to the West, which included respect and perhaps even a dose of admiration, and is becoming overtly arrogant. China is already behaving as a rising power against the receding West and it does not hesitate to defend its own ideological bases, downplaying those of the West. The Chinese CC has openly denounced the western liberal regime, which it describes as dangerous and ineffective, citing the effectiveness of its own model, namely the country's one-party rule, arguing that it should be promoted to the rest of the world. At the party's 19th congress, Xi Jinping proposed "a new option for other countries" involving "Chinese wisdom and the Chinese approach to solving the problems of the human race" (The Economist). The democratic regime of the West with its freedom is also at the center of discussions and concerns in China, and is generally rejected because it is considered the cause for the weakness and decline of the Western world. These contradictions are also likely to be heightened by the fact that Xi Jinping, China's CC Secretary General has changed his country's constitution so that he can remain in power for as long as he wants.

How different will the world be, with the new international economic order being ruled by China and the US no longer? How will globalization, capitalism, Western values ​​and liberal democracy evolve? The new world will, of course, be different from that prevailing in the West after the end of World War II and up to the present day. Not, however, as different as it may seem at first glance. This is because, the West has also witnessed significant changes, which are usually not taken seriously enough in comparisons. Let's try to list some:

3.1. Globalization

Let me begin with globalization under Western standards, which is already significantly shrinking under the combined burden of rising nationalism, the return to protectionism, the threat of migration, and the revived respect for national borders. There are three forms of globalization currently prevailing and operating in the world: the traditional western one, the Chinese one with the "new silk road", and the digital one, which has been growing rapidly in recent years.

As far as one can foresee in a constantly changing world, these three globalizations will continue to coexist for some time, and when China fully dominates the globe, its own form of globalization will wipe out the western one. Digital globalization will naturally continue to grow rapidly, coexisting and complementing the Chinese one.

It can be argued that Chinese globalization does not involve a clear choice of open borders, but of adequately managed open borders. China's interest, seemingly at least, is not primarily to compete with the US or the EU, but to build its own empire, in which the economies of the partner countries are linked and in some way dependent on it and not in competition with it. China wants to regulate the terms of trade and maintain a harmonious hierarchy in its relations with other countries. China's intention is to restructure Asia on the basis of a system of political and economic cooperation based on local development and implemented with the help of Chinese investment. With the introduction of this new system of cooperation, China differentiates itself from the American system of competitive cooperation, which it considers illegal (Mottet and Lassere). China's opening up to free trade goes hand in hand with strong protection for its industries (Mottet and Lassere). There is obviously no question as to whether China applies the free competition regime. On the contrary, it is rather obvious that China is following F. List's urges on the need to protect its infant industries from free competition, and is seeking all sorts of combinations between different and often conflicting systems.

It is only natural that the West is seriously worried with China's intentions concerning its foreign trade and relations with other countries, as these are not clear, especially since Xi Jinping has triumphantly been named China's lifelong president by 3000 representatives of the people. The West fears the impact that China's envisaged massive investment may have, mainly in the Balkans, as well as its ambitious goals, with its "Made in China 2025" program to promote Chinese products and new technologies. These fears are justified, at least in part, by the fact that Chinese companies receive high state subsidies, wherever and whenever necessary, thereby securing special privileges over Western businesses and products.

3.2. Capitalism

China has expertly combined communism and capitalism. Its persistence in maintaining communism, in spite of its very significant openings to capitalism, can be explained less as an adherence to ideologies and much more as continuing to maintain the cohesion of this vast country. Confucianism which guarantees respect for social hierarchy and imperial rules, and operates independently of political parties, has been combined with or even partially replaced communism. Chinese leader Xi Jinping, like Mao, also attributes a great importance to combining religion and the communist regime because it is a powerful uniting factor of the people (Buruma). What began and is still continuing in China is "the introduction of capitalism only so far as it guarantees democratic reforms ensuring bureaucratic accountability, encouraging competition and limiting the power of leaders" (Ang).

Thus, modern China has not only been persuaded to accept private companies and entrepreneurs within its realm, but has also taken steps to effectively support them. The private sector is privileged in China, provided it remains under the control of the government. These companies are generously supported by the Government with legitimate methods but also, in many cases, by means that are in opposition to healthy competition, and which anger the US. In addition, the size and power of these Chinese companies are constantly monitored so that their operation does not go unchecked and surpasses the capabilities and power of entire countries, as in the case of many multinational Western companies.

The Chinese private sector contributes by 2/3 to the growth of the economy and by 9/10 to the creation of new jobs (All-China). However, in spite of the success of the private sector, ideological voices have been raised, accusing the leaders of its failure to adhere to the principles of communism and calling for its abolition, arguing that it has accomplished its goal which was its contribution to the development of China, especially now that China's growth has somewhat slowed down (Yuan).

It should be noted that Communist China also tolerates 647 billionaires on its territory which exceeds the 631 present in America.

It goes without saying that the successful combination between market and government prevailing in modern China reserves a special place for private ownership. Indeed, in the case of China, it is well understood that the smooth functioning of the economy requires the coexistence, complementarity and close cooperation between the private and public sectors. And according to all evidence in this area, China has achieved this cooperation, which due to its monolithic past should have been particularly difficult. In the West, by contrast, the utter dominance of the extreme neoliberal view after the 1970s often perceives the public sector almost as a flaw and an anomaly of the system.

3.3. Liberal democracy

The most important accusation of the West against China is the lack of democracy. China's response to this accusation is that: "Everyone wants to enjoy the benefits of democracy, but political analysts would make a deadly mistake in thinking that they can only be achieved by the complete transplant of the American political system" (Ang).

It is naturally a fact that the West strongly believes in its own democracy as the only system that ensures the well-being of its citizens, and furthermore, that its own democratic system is automatically imposed on economies that go beyond a critical threshold of growth, communication and information. The West, therefore, seemed certain that China would adopt this regime as soon as it met the necessary conditions for it. However, although China has exceeded the "intermediate income" threshold, and although communications technology has spread rapidly, with 600 million Chinese holding smart phones and 750 million Chinese Internet users, and in spite of the evolution of the system to a more authoritarian one, western forecasts as to the change of regime have been refuted. Moreover we must eventually accept that authoritarian systems can be just as, or even more effective, than Western democracy. Furthermore, the degree of democracy actually practiced in the West does not differ as often as one believes from the non-liberal system imposed by populism in general (Friedman). Finally, there is democracy outside the West, with completely different standards and conditions, but with the same goal, that of the well-being of citizens. Its achievements, and not only, allow the view that the advantages of democracy are not a monopoly of the West, that they can also be achieved by recipes different from the Western ones and that this also paves the way for the dominance of “populist parties all over the world". These newly established political parties or even governments, have adopted many elements of unfree democracy, which is being implemented in China, and not only.

4.       Conclusion

Hopefully, in the end, the Third World War will be avoided, and the transfer of world domination from the West to the East will be as smooth and as peaceful as possible. Certainly, developments in this sensitive area will depend on the rise of nationalism prevailing in China, as well as in Trump's America. An interesting question is whether this rise of nationalism enhances or reduces the tension between China and the US. Does it increase or decrease the chances of war? I would argue that both cases are equally likely.

The radical changes, as far as they can be sketched so far in advance, are summarized as follows: Globalization, as we have known it, will continue to decline. Let me mention that the growth rate of world trade has decreased from 5.5% in 2017 to 2.1%, and foreign investment was reduced by 1/5 compared to the previous year (The Economist). The establishment of Chinese globalization also foresees the simultaneous development of many countries and regions of the world that were in poverty until now. Capitalism, on the other hand, will continue, but in a different form and probably, as state capitalism. Democracy will continue to exist, but more and more as a non-liberal rather than liberal democracy. On the other hand, whether the people will be more or less happy and satisfied with their lives than in the past will largely depend on the form of income distribution. If the new world regime succeeds in reducing the enormous inequalities, and providing everyone with an income that covers both basic and non-basic needs (5), the world will surely be better.

* For a more in-depth analysis of this broader topic see: the author's latest essay entitled "The End of the Economic Dominance of the West and the Invasion of the East", Delivani Foundation and Ianos, 2018.

Endnotes

·        Taking into account purchasing power differences in the two economies.

·        Except for Russia and Brazil, India, South Africa, as well as their partner countries of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) which include Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and more recently Pakistan.

·        Statement by Xi Jinping at the 19th Chinese Communist Congress.

·        From the US China Economic and Security Review Commission.

·        Bearing in mind that what is meant by basic needs is evolving and that the enjoyment of life requires satisfaction, in addition to basic and certain non-basic needs.

References

All-China Federation of Industry and Commerce

Allison, Graham (2017) "China vs America" Foreign Affairs, September/October

Ang, Yuen Yuen (2018), "Autocracy With Chinese Characteristics", Foreign Affairs,May/June

Buruma, Ian (2019), "The tenacity of Chinese Communism International New York Times30/09

Cohen, Roger (2017), "China has Trump where it wants him", International New York Times, 13/11

Durden, Tyler (2017), "China Launches Yuan Ruble Payment System", 13/10, http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/12dHT7XumJk/china-launches-yuan-ruble-

Engdahl, William(2018), "Are Russia and China deciding to abandon the dollar", (Presentation by Michael Stylianos), New Eastern Outlook, 24/01

Friedman , Thomas L.(2018) , "Is the U.S. becoming like China"? International New York Times, 11/05

Fukuyama, Francis (1989) The End of History and the Last Man is a 1992 book by Francis Fukuyama, expanding on his 1989 essay "The End of History?", published in the international affairs journal The National Interest.

Fukuyama, Francis (2018), “Retour sur “La fin de l’histoire”, Commentaire, no 161, Paris, printemps

Gramsci Antonio -Cahiers de Prison, nrf, Editions Gallimard

Hansen, Alvin (1939) "Economic Progress and Declining Population Growth", American Economic Review 29 (1):1-15

Lind, Jennifer (2017), "Asia's Other Revisionist Power, Foreign Affairs, March/April

Londono, Ernesto (2019),"US and China collide in El Salvador", International New York Times, 26/09

Mottet, Eric et Frédéric Lasserre (2018) Dossier L'initiative Belt and Road", Stratégie Chinoise du Grand Jeu? Diplomatie No 90, January/February

Negreponti-Delivani Maria (2018), "The End of the Economic Dominance of the West and the Invasion of the East", Delivani Foundation and Ianos (under publication in French by L'Harmattan)

Pentapostagma, 21.10.20118

Rappeport. A., and Keith Bradsher (2018), "A fence around China",INYT, 19/10

Summers, Laurence (2013)"Why Stagnation Might Prove to be the New Normal", Financial Times, 15/12

Swanson, Ana and Alan Rappeport (2018), "Trump looks to curb Chinese investment", International New York Times, 30/03

Smith, Noah (2017), "Who is the world's No 1 Economy? Not the U.S." 18/10 1:30 μ.μ.

The Economist, Special Report, Global supply chain, July 13th, 2019

Wong, Edward (2019), “China shows the world its military muscle”, INYT, 04/10

Yuan, Li (2018), «Beijing is pushing back into business, INYT 6-7, October