To start today's discourse, I'm going to use an old joke and an exclamation which has become quite popular recently. The joke goes like this: When will there be a global famine? When the Chinese realize that rice is just a side dish. The exclamation is something like: "Wow, look what these Chinese are doing!!!" and is usually a reaction to yet another news from China about a new high speed train, 5G mobile network, building a hospital in 10 days and so on. And despite their seemingly opposite directions: the joke gives a sense of patronizing pity towards the poor and hungry people, and the exclamation is an expression of admiration for China's incredibly rapid economic growth, I will try to show that both premises are inaccurate, since both, to one degree or another, spring from the wrong assumption, namely: that China has always been a very poor country. 

The astonishment at the surprisingly rapid economic growth of the giant from the East reminds me of a story from many years ago, when our delivery company, “Mariana”, started working with professors from the American University. Because of my terrible English, I had to take the orders through a university interpreter at first. The business took off and before long, thanks to the frequent contacts with foreigners, my English quickly improved, so after some time I didn’t need the help of the interpreter. I remember that once the wife of the then CFO of AUBG, her name was Debbie Pittman, who was our regular client, praised me by saying that she has never met a foreigner whose English has improved so quickly. I'm not going to lie that I didn't enjoy it, but what Debbie didn't know was that as a high school student, at my father's insistence – thank you, Dad – I took private English lessons, and then continued to diligently study the language during my 2 years of military service (my father would send me new words he wrote on paper specially cut out in a format to fit in the top pocket of my army uniform, again "Thank you"). After the army, I didn't need English, and little by little I forgot almost everything I had learned. So at the beginning of my work with AUBG, I had to use an interpreter. However, when I started communicating with the American professors, it turned out that I had not forgotten things completely, and thanks to the previously acquired skills (which due to long period of  non-use were quite patchy) I was able to restore my knowledge so quickly. After giving myself 30 seconds to enjoy the praise, I confessed to Debbie that I hadn't actually gained any new knowledge of English, but had rather regained forgotten skills. So, having used the occasion to boast with my English, let’s go back to China and its incredible economic miracle – my opinion is that there is no miracle unheard of, but simply China is returning to a place where it has been for a huge part of its five-thousand-year history, namely amongst the most developed economically, culturally and politically societies of the world. And those who can't fathom this rapid out of nowhere growth of China risk falling into the same delusion that Debbie fell into in terms of my "super abilities" to learn English. For thousands of years, China has been superior, equal or, in some cases, a bit inferior to the strongest and most developed societies of the respective historical period. China's contribution to the world's cultural, economic and socio-political achievements is huge, extremely important and obvious to anyone dealing with world history. What misleads many in their assessment of China is the fact that the period of recent history, the one closest to us (I speak the years from about 1850 to 1978), is really very difficult for China. The country is in crisis, losing its economic, cultural and military influence and is even placed in a degrading and subordinate position by the western countries on the rise. I would like to argue, however, that this period is an exception to the rule, and what should actually be of more interest to us is the question: WHY and HOW did China allow itself to fall off the elite nations on the world stage and for about 150 years to become this pitiful, poor, confused country that has become the subject of ridicule and tasteless jokes. (To that question, we'll come back later).

 As for the rice joke, my goal is not to attack the joke, it's great, and I even find the banter with the side dish quite original, but still for the sake of the 15 years I spent in Asia eating the "side dishe", I would like to say something in defense of rice and rice-eaters.

 With regards to the issue of food diversity, let's talk a little about restaurants and their history. After all, they are the public institution dedicated precisely to food and everything related to it. It is believed that modern restaurants originated in XVIII century France. In 1765, a French chef named Monsieur Boulanger, opened his business in Paris selling soups and broths. Above the door, he placed an advertising inscription in Latin advertising his "restaurabo". The word restaurant comes from the Latin word "restorare", which means "restore" and since medieval times it has been used to denote meat soups and broths, which were thought to be healthy, ergo "restore" the health of a person. And so from Latin and then through French now the word restaurant in many languages means exactly what it means. It is believed that this was the first place offering a menu with a choice of different dishes to its customers. However, the first "real" restaurant is believed to have opened in 1782, "La Grande Taverne de Londres" (The Great London Tavern) again in Paris. The restaurant was founded by Antoine Beauvillier and has remained for more than 20 years without competition.

However, it turns out that five centuries earlier on the other side of the world, in China, they already had their numerous and working at full-capacity restaurants. The Southern Song Dynasty (1127–1279) had a territory about 4 times the territory of XVIII century France and a population of 60 million (according to Wikipedia, the population of France in 1226 was 16 million). At the beginning of the XIII century Hangzhou was the largest city in the world with a population of about 1 million (by comparison Paris at that time was about several tens of thousands). I pay so much attention to the issue of the emergence of restaurants, because I agree with the assertion of Professor Kiefer, who sees restaurants mostly as something that is the culmination of certain economic processes, not just a fashion idea or trend. Thus, the presence of restaurants in a country in a given historical period can be considered as an indicator of the dynamics of economic activity and the material well-being of that country. And in XIII century China there were many and crowded restaurants. Here is a passage from a book published in 1187. The book is called "Dreams of the Splendor of the Eastern Capital" by an author named Meng YuanLao. At that time the capital he dreamed of was the city of Kaifeng (which had already been conquered by invaders) and the author lived in the new capital Hangzhou. Here's how he describes Hangzhou restaurants:" The moment customers choose which table they want to sit at, they are asked what they will want. The people of Hangzhou are very capricious. Hundreds of orders rain on all sides: this one wants something hot, another something cold, a third something heated, a fourth thing chilled; one wants cooked food, another something raw, some want a roast, others choose something on a grill. Everybody orders different things. The waiter picks up the order and goes to the counter, from where he calls the ordered dishes in order of order. After a while, he takes three bowls in his left hand and arranges about twenty dishes on his right hand (from palm to shoulder) and delivers them to the tables according to what was ordered. He's not allowed the slightest mistake.”

 There were also specialized restaurants only for certain types of food or regional dishes. Fashion goods and products were available in specialized stores, and street vendors offered pieces of roast pork.

So, now let's get out of the culinary banter and get a little more serious. I will, however, begin with a warning from Fernand Braudel, a French historian who encyclopedia Britannica defines as "one of the most important historians of the 20th century". In his book A History of Civilizations, he says: "We must try to understand that the two great civilizations in the Far East (India and China) are millennial civilizations and forget our experience of people from the West." In China, the size, volumes, duration and, above all, uninterruptible continuity in the development of society are of a range and in scale beyond many European frameworks. That's why it's hard for us, perhaps even impossible, to adequately understand them. European history is composed of a series of historical periods: roughly speaking, in ancient antiquity we have about 700 years of classical period with the pagan brilliance of Greece and Rome and their achievements in the field of politics, philosophy, medicine, military affairs, construction and engineering. After the collapse of the Roman Empire followed a period of chaotic migration from within and without Europe of all sorts of German, Hun and Slavic peoples, who, from the point of view of Greeks and Romans, were "barbarians". The achievements of Greece and Rome have been destroyed; chaos, illiteracy, and powerlessness. The next thousand years (500 – 1500) was the Middle Ages. These years, deservedly or not, are called "The Dark Ages." No one even remembered Rome anymore. The once majestic Roman Forum has become a pasture. The area is known as Campo Vaccino, which means Pasture for livestock. Christianity and the institutions of the Catholic Church take the place of science, philosophy and art. Everything in the world is viewed through the prism of the new religion. The following were 300 - 400 years of Early - modern period that began with the Renaissance and ended with the Enlightenment. Europeans rediscovered the classic heritage of Greece and Rome. The Middle Ages were denied, the absolute authority of the church was rejected, and it was blamed for all the troubles. Enlightenment was followed by the Scientific and later the Industrial Revolution and the emergence of national states. In new Western consumer societies, material well-being and technical progress become a key measure of judging success. Faith and religion are berated and denied, and instead of God, Europeans now worship rationalism and preach atheism. Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and Elon Musk are the new Holy trinity. Throughout this series of periods, not only is there no clearly visible continuity, but on the contrary, we very often witness a furious and total denial of the achievements of a given periods by those who come after it.

The case of China is completely the opposite – every period of history (with few exceptions) is related to the period before it, as well as to the one that follows. Instead of total denial, there is continuity with some adjustments. This allows China, relying on its traditions, to accumulate thousands of years of experience and use it to amass success and prosperity, or to deal with difficulties and crises when they face them. The underlying ideology of Chinese society for 2,000 years has been Confucianism (again with some periods of reduction of this influence, but not fatal). Confucius is known for his conservatism and for solving society's problems he always seeks a solution by looking back. He was highly suspicious of people with innovative and revolutionary proposals to reform the system. And such an approach provides China with a basis for very successful development for over two millennia.

Now let's go back another 500 years. We get to the Tang Dynasty (618–970). According to Professor John Roberts, a British historian, "VII century Tang represented the most advanced civilization at the time and the capital XiAn (a city that still exists today) was probably the largest city in the world with a population of 1 million inside the fortress wall and another 1 million living outside it. Each of the two main markets is divided into 10 parts and each part is divided into alleys. On each alley is sold only one type of goods: pharmacy materials, clothes, gold and silver. Gold and silver traders also offer their clients bank vaults, kind of serving as proto-bankers.

Let's look even further back in time and compare China with the most successful empire in European history, the Great Roman Empire. Luckily for us, Rome (27 BCE–476 CE) and the Han Dynasty (202 BCE–220 CE) overlap in time almost perfectly. Both empires managed for an extended period - about 400 years - to impose their rule over vast territories and roughly the same population - about 50 million. Both create extremely efficient and capable political systems through which they impose long periods of law and order, which in turn contributed to robust economic and cultural growth.

From the Han Dynasty comes the military classic, "The Art of War" by the great Chinese master and philosopher XunZi, one of the greatest achievements of military thought ever created. The book is still used as a teaching aid at the American Military Academy in West Point and is listed as a "recommended reading" for cadets at the Royal Military Academy of Great Britain. Douglas McCarter, a five-star U.S. army general in the 1930s who was commander of the U.N. troops during the Korean War, said he always had a copy of "The Art of War" on his desk. Former U.S. Army Chief of Staff and then U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said, "I've read The Art of War" on XunZi. He continues to influence both soldiers and politicians."

Future generations will remember the empire and enjoy its achievements, but it was irretrievably lost and never restored again. However, the Han Dynasty, when it reached a size it considered optimal, voluntarily ceased its expansion and managed to retain the territories already conquered and Sinicized them (to my knowledge, China is the only example of an empire which was able to preserve and consolidate its territories after its expansion was halted). Thus, although it was later defeated, its institutions and achievements were revived by the subsequent dynasties. And perhaps a major reason for this is the presence of a powerful and disciplined bureaucratic apparatus, infused with the ethical norms of Confucianism. According to the Swedish sinologists and former professor at Columbia University, Hans Bielenstein,: " China created the most impressive system of governance in the world at the time, and also in later times."   

No matter how far back in time we go, we invariably find China that is well organized, rich, refined and inventive. And we have all this information because of China's perhaps most important invention, namely the Chinese characters. Their creation is shrouded in legends and ambiguities, but one thing we known for sure: Chinese characters are among the oldest written systems in the world and are the oldest script that continues to be used without interruptions since its creation. They are extremely important to the Chinese from the very beginning. Their writing is what distinguishes them from other tribes and is a pivotal moment in their self-determination as Chinese, that is, NOT barbarians. Characters are the main thing they saw as separating them from the "barbarians" and making them a civilized people. They are also what made it possible to build the excellent bureaucracy that we just talked about.

According to British historian John Roberts, "literacy and political culture in China are as closely linked as nowhere else." Chinese writing arises and develops very quickly. We have no data on intermediate stages in its development. So we do not know much about its early stages of development, but at one point, about 3,500 years ago, it appeared. This is the period from which we can see the Chinese as a self-determined community. And their ability to record their history and their actions is an essential element of their self-determination process.

And after we left China in the XIII century and reached the very beginning of Chinese civilization – the Chinese characters, let's jump far ahead again and talk about China from the period XV – XIX century.When Vasco da Gama first arrived in India in 1498, his goods were completely unacceptable to barter-trade by local authorities. Asians had better fabrics and better quality metal and ceramics. It looked like the expedition, which was sent mainly and mostly for commercial purposes would be a complete failure. Luckily, he had some gold, which the locals willingly accepted, and so Vasco da Gama was able to buy enough Indian merchandise and after returning home to persuade the Portuguese king to continue the expeditions. The next time he arrives in India, however, Vasco da Gama, instead of the useless fabrics and pottery goods, brings a serious arsenal of weapons aboard his ships. Unable to persuade local traders to trade with him in the normal business way, da Gama resorted to piracy, attacking and looting Arab ships on the high seas.

Before that, an interesting fact from world history: which country received the largest share of silver coming from the newly discovered South America in the period XVI – XVIII century? Someone might assume Spain or France (which inherited Spain as a hegemon, or even England, which later dominated the oceans). The correct answer, however, is China (the second largest recipient, by the way, is India). And the reason for this is something we just mentioned, namely the poor quality goods that Europe produced at the time. In both, textiles and pottery, as well as iron processing, European artisans can offer nothing of interest to the Indian and Chinese traders. Asia, however, has many goods that are in very high demand in Europe – tea, spices, porcelain. The Europeans would pay dearly to get their hands on the famous Indian and Chinese spices and teas. In 1866, England imported 43,000 tons of Chinese tea. "At that time, the value of tea imported from China was greater than the value of all goods exported from England to China taken together. The duties on tea imports represent a significant percentage of the British government's revenues" (J. Roberts "History of China p. 215). Not to mention the exquisite porcelain динер and tea сетс arriving from China to replace the clumsy iron bowls in medieval Europe. During XVII century the word China became synonymous with porcelain and fine porcelain workshops. However, as we have already said, the Europeans had nothing of quality to offer China and India, and therefore were forced to pay in cash – the silver from South America, which we have just mentioned. Silver flooded China to such an extent that in 1531 the Emperor issued a decree on the unification of land tax and labor tax and ordered that the payment of the combined tax be in silver instead of in products and labor.

In the autumn of 1792, Britain sent its first diplomatic mission to China. After almost one-year of unsuccessful attempts to arrange an audience on September 8, 1793, Ambassador George McCarthy finally managed to meet the Chinese Emperor Qian Long. Kneeling before the emperor, McCarthy, who regarded his country as the most powerful in the world, presented him with gifts from the King of Great Britain. One of the goals of the mission was to persuade the Chinese to accept English goods as barter for Chinese tea. As we already saw until then the British had paid mainly in cash (silver), which created a huge payment imbalance (This imbalance was reversed only in 1830-1840, when Europe was finally able to receive payments in precious metals from China for its goods). Very telling is the emperor's response to the King of England. After repeatedly calling all Europeans barbarians willing to take advantage of the benefits of the sub-heavenly empire, Emperor Qiang Long declared: "Until now, all European nations, including the barbarian merchants of your country, have done their trade with our heavenly empire in Canton (Guangzhou). This has been the procedure for a long time, even though our Heavenly Empire has everything in abundance and misses nothing. So we don't need to import goods made by barbarians in return for our goods.' With this, the Chinese Emperor rejected all suggestions from the British.

EUROPE – FROM THE DARK AGES TO A LEADING FORCE 

So, having seen all these remarkable achievements of China in various areas of economy and socio-political life for 2 thousand years and the arrogance (perhaps somewhat justified) manifested by their emperor at the very end of the XVII century, we come to the main, in my opinion, question that I mentioned at the beginning of our conversation, namely:

 Why didn't China move on and create a dynamic, progressive society? But before we try to answer this question, it would be more interesting first to ask how Europe managed to rise from the Middle ages of misery, illiteracy, political chaos and lack of technical ingenuity and become, in the 19th century, a technologically leading force.

 A very short but also rather telling explanation is contained in the title of Italian economist and historian Carlo Cippola's book "Weapons, Sails and Empires". Europeans manifest themselves as extremely skilled copycats. For example, they successfully used the gunpowder discovered by China to create rifles, especially guns. Interesting and somewhat paradoxical is the fact that long before they knew what gunpowder was, Europeans were advancing in the field metallurgy to make ever larger church bells for their ever-larger churches and cathedrals. I suppose that just as individual countries are now competing over where the tallest building will be built, so Christians one competed to see which church has the largest bell. People don't change, only the things they think are prestigious change. It's all about priorities. And it was the experience of processing metals, accumulated in the production of all these huge bells, that subsequently helped the Europeans to reorient themselves very quickly and, already having gunpowder, to improve in the production of bronze and iron cannons. And as we have already seen from the history of Vasco do Gama and are about to see again in the history of opium wars, the power of guns can easily prevail over the power of arguments, especially if gun ownership is combined with a lack of moral scruples. Thus, something for which the Middle Ages are cruelly blamed by modern Europe, namely over-religiousness, ultimately plays a crucial role in its military successes, which in turn is vital to the imposition of a new, modern Europe on the world stage. Here's a case where just blind luck can tip the scales of world history in this or that direction. Two other happy circumstances also help the West to industrialize: (1) the large reserves of coal that replace depleted wood resources and serve to power the new steam machines. 2) the overseas colonies that supply it (the West) with the literally free calories of sugar produced in slave plantations and the silver needed to buy Indian cotton and Chinese porcelain. Two other inventions critical to the success of European naval expeditions are sails and compass. The former were invented by the Arabs, but the Europeans, as we have already mentioned, are zealous and skillful imitators. The compass, on the other hand, came from China, which, with the exception of a fragmented (but extremely impressive) episode between 1405 and 1433, showed no interest in sea expeditions, military or commercial.

 After establishing their technological superiority, Europeans began to judge other societies solely according to their level of technological development and, as a result, concluded that they (Europeans) are superior to all other societies (regardless of the big and rich cities in Asia, the numerous discoveries and the multi-time traditions and rich culture of China and India). And this way of assessing the status of individual societies continues to exist to this day.

WHY DID CHINA LOSE ITS LEADERSHIP AND REFUSED TO COPY THE WEST?

And now I think it's high time we tried to find an answer to the big question: How and why did China lose its leading position, which it had had for so long? And the related question: Why didn’t China subsequently copy the West's military and technological advances? Most likely, there is not a simple explanation that gives us a satisfactory answer, but I would like to present to your attention the reasoning of Prof. Peter Stearns. In one of his audio lectures series, "A Brief History of the World," he talks about several possible reasons. According to him, most likely in the XVIII century China is already beginning to feel the weight of its overpopulation. During the long peaceful period of development from the end of the XVII to the end of the XVIII century, China's population doubled, reaching over 300 million from 150 million. And in 1850, it was already 430 million. The very need to feed this huge population has certainly negatively affected the dynamism of the Chinese economy and its growth opportunities. During this period we could notice a retreat of China, which is no longer a main source of important technological innovations, there is also a decline in cultural ingenuity and originality. This interdependence between the large population and the lack of technological progress is also important according to the French historian Fernand Braudel, who in his book "History of Civilizations" says: "Greco-Roman antiquity, which is so intelligent, did not have the machines corresponding to its intellect. But in fact, she never aspired to have them — unfortunately for her, she owned slaves. Classical China, formed well before the 13th century, also very intelligent and especially technically, unfortunately also had too many people. The man in China was worth nothing – he did all the tasks in an economy that practically neglects even domestic animals. As a result, China, which has long outpaced everyone in scientific terms, will not cross the threshold of modern science. He will leave Europe this privilege, this honor, this profit."

 Another factor is some over-bureaucratization of the administration, cluttered with too much paperwork, which makes the decision-making process quite sluggish, and effective relations with the provinces are also disrupted. Here are some more possible reasons: Although it invented the printing press and began printing books long before Europe, the vast majority of China's population remained illiterate; the vast cities of the east, despite all their brilliance and commercial buzz, do not provide personal freedom and space, things that protect the personality and innovative ideas in Europe. The rich otherwise cultural and intellectual life in ancient China is unable (or perhaps unwilling) to question and effectively criticize the established order. In Europe, it was the intellectuals who revolutionized European civilization. Even in the field of technology, where China achieves so much and so early, there is also this strange mismatch between intellectual fertility and revolutionary changes.

Perhaps the most important factor, however, is China’s refusal to seek a source for reforming and renewing the system by taking on models from the west. Although they are well aware of Europe’s achievements, the Chinese have decided not to adopt them. One of the reasons, and most likely the main reason, for this is the reluctance of the Confucian ruling elite to engage and attach importance to activities that will increase the prestige of traders and trade. In China, the farmer who produces the real goods is in an honorary place. Trade, which simply deals with exchange, is viewed with distrust and neglect bordering on contempt. The Chinese even have a special expression that distinguishes the four classes in society according to their meaning:士农工保 (She Nong Gong Shang) –士 She is the highest class, that of educated gentlemen/scholars; they are the ministers and advisers of the king; second are 农 Nong- the farmers; after them are 工 Gong – workers; and at the bottom are商Шанг – merchants. By the way, distrust of traders is not just a Chinese view, in one of his dialogues Plato mentions that no self-respecting aristocrat would give his daughter as a wife to a merchant. As we already mentioned, ancient Greece also is often criticized for lack of technological progress. In her case, as a reason it is usually given the presence of a constant influx of slaves who do the manual work, providing the aristocracy with the luxury of leisure, which is the absolute mandatory condition in order to be able to engage in the only activities that free citizens considered prestigious, namely politics, philosophy and the muses. And here I recall the words of an American philosopher, the late Rick Roderick, who believes that perhaps the absence of philosophy from the life of today's Western man is mostly due to his excessive employment. In Europe, however, as already mentioned, there is a lack of continuity and for about 1,000 years Plato, Socrates and the other Athenian and Roman wise men have been completely forgotten and had to be rediscovered during the Renaissance. In China, Confucianism is not only never forgotten, but on the contrary, it is the moral code used to create the educated the elite, which has been China's de facto ruling class since the time of the Han Dynasty, around the time of Christ, when Confucianism was declared China's core philosophy. The imperial exams, which recruited staff for the administration, are essentially a check on how well you've absorbed and embraced the canons of Confucianism.

By the way, a friend of mine, to whom I had sent this paper after I wrote it, told me an interesting story. Years ago, he visited a Korean female Buddhist monastery (my friend is married to a Korean woman). And there asked the nun: What is the meaning of life? She answered with a single word: 仁 Ren.

Imbued with the spirit of Confucianism, the Chinese bureaucracy fears abrupt changes, not to mention revolutions, be it industrial, technical or scientific. For Confucius, like any true conservative, revolutions are the greatest evil in the state, and they must be avoided. A fundamental guiding principle is to preserve the social order and cultural heritage of ancestors. And from this perspective, Western innovations are useless to the Chinese and their way of life.

 As a result of this policy of passivity and disinterest in new discoveries, China is soon forced to confront a modernized, energetic, teeming with enthusiasm and power Europe. Young and arrogant Europe that combines with devastating effect its possession of heavy guns with the absence of moral scruples. In 1839, the British began the First Opium War against China, one of the purposes of which was to force a sovereign state to legalize the sale of opium on its territory. When China refuses, the so-called 'gunboat diplomacy' . Using the superiority of their fleet, they bombed Chinese ports, and the result was the Nanking Treaty, which took Hong Kong from China. Before long, the Second Opium War followed, leading to other Western countries intervening in the looting of the weakened Chinese Empire. The US, France and Russia were all involved in the fight to break up territories and establish unequal trade relations with China. In China, they are called the Unfair Treaties, and for all Chinese they are a symbol of immense national humiliation and are seen as a grave injustice committed against their country. The years from about 1840 to 1950 were known in China as the "Age of Humiliation". For China, this age of humiliation is actually doubly offensive. For, China has always considered itself a great power and a great civilization; it has always believed in its superiority over the rest of the world, in which there is only barbarism. Hence the double humiliation: first, to become a nation simply equal to all others (not superior one) and, secondly, to become a nation dominated by the barbarians, by their weapons and their science.

This situation was extremely complicated for China, because for the first time in its long history something new and unknown is happening. In China, there have been many collapses of various dynasties, followed by periods of chaos, wars and misery. But they all happened in a familiar Confucian, Chinese environment. And dealing with them has happened inside, and with the tools of, traditional Confucian, Chinese societal structures and mechanisms. External forces and influences were inevitably assimilated and absorbed by Chinese civilization (perhaps the only exception was Buddhism, but it also had to undergo significant changes before it was adopted in China). In all previous cases, the Chinese had no doubt about the superiority of their understandings and their way of life over that of the "barbarians". This time, however, besides military, there is also a cultural/civilization invasion. For the first time, part of Chinese society began to have doubts about Confucianism and its social, moral and societal norms and rituals. People are starting to wonder if the adherence to traditions and old order is not actually China's main problem. There was a serious debate within Chinese society about the validity and correctness of previously regarded as ultimate and unquestionable Chinese values. Some people who openly declare their preference for the Western system and its values and furiously attack as backward and inadequate feudal Confucian public regulation. This, of course, further weakens, at least in the first place, China. No doubt western barbarians had to be expelled, but in order to achieve this, the science and technique of the West had to be mastered first. At the end, after a long and excruciating period of luring, China shows exceptional ability to cope with the new rules of the game. "In a short time, the oldest living civilization became the youngest and most progressive force among all developing countries. But perhaps this is because it can lean on one of the most ancient and solid originalities in its ancient civilization: its bureaucratic organization." (Braudel p. 283)

 It may sound paradoxical, but it is the same bureaucratic apparatus that, as you remember, was cited by historians as one of the main reasons (with its stiffness, clumsiness and reluctance to change) for China's decline - that now emerges as the main tool and culprit for the incredible successes of the "New China." The authorities in Beijing love this phrase, "The New China" and the expression is at the forefront of government propaganda. I understand the motives of China's current rulers, who want to take all the credit for the country's successes of the past 70 years, but I still have reservations about this phrase and its attempt to suggest the existence of some clear distinction between the "old" and the "new" China. And these reservations of mine are born of my immense love of the history and philosophy of ancient China and my conviction that, however incredible the economic and technological advances of modern China may seem, it is inextricably linked to and unthinkable without "Old China." According to the French historian Fernand Braudel, "we all tend - spontaneously - to look at the world that surrounds us only in the very short time of our own lives and to see its history (the world’s) just like a fast pace movie in which everything goes one after the other or collides: wars, battles, political negotiations, revolutions, economic unrest, ideas, intellectual, artistic mods ...". And I believe that for many people, the more distant stories really are mostly a kaleidoscope of events, celebrities and dry statistical facts that we read about in the history books, but we find it difficult to see their connection to the living life that surrounds us today. And for people with such a point of view, China's history would inevitably be constrained by the framework: "50-60 years ago China was nothing, look at what they are doing now." Which brings us back to the exclamation with which I began this discourse. However, looking through the prism of history (which is infinitely more comprehensive than a human life), these 100-150 years are just one episode, granted difficult and humiliating, yet only an episode. And most importantly, this episode is an exception to the rule, it is only an anomaly. A bad dream in the millennia-long history of great China. And now, awaken from its bad dream, China is returning to the place that has belonged to it for most of world history. And therefore, choosing the historical perspective, instead of greeting with "Welcome" the new, shiny, fast-paced and modern China, I would like to say "Welcome back" to the old, calm, patient and wise China.