To conquer the new culture of the 21st century

Author: Shanghai Foka Economic Forecast Research Institute
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2005-08-01
Features: In today's world, humanity is undergoing a phase of civilizational transformation, with the "Nebula Culture" gradually taking shape. With its qualities of "colliding," "learning," "forward-looking," and "creative," it is poised to dominate the 21st century. This book systematically introduces the process of transitioning from a "Root Culture" to a "Nebula Culture." When it comes to culture, many people can speak passionately and offer insightful perspectives. Indeed, in China, a nation with millennia of splendid culture, it is hard to believe that one could lack a certain cultural perspective. When discussing works on cultural research, almost all scholars and cultural figures instinctively propose the same model: cultural research must take history as a reference point, which is the prerequisite. If history and tradition are ignored, the research is deemed superficial, unrigorous, and lacking authority, with the researcher appearing unskilled or even nonsensical. In China, it is very difficult to become an outstanding cultural scholar because if you adhere to tradition, it is hard to surpass the predecessors and you remain in the shadow of the "giants"; if you break from conventions, innovate, and stand out, you must endure various critiques and sanctions from "patriots." Moreover, if you do not follow the established conventions of language, viewpoints, styles, logic, and models in your research, your work may be completely dismissed as "alternative," your research will not be recognized, or even rejected. The main reasons for the "hardening" in the cultural field are two: First, excessive emphasis is placed on the weight of history, with an almost worshipful attitude toward the original laws of historical development, with little skepticism or denial. The saying "History is the coordinate of the future" and "Original laws cannot be bypassed" is rarely questioned. It is precisely because of this that rigid cultural research models have emerged, even academic styles must be uniform. The roots of historical culture are deeply embedded in the hearts of scholars. Second, because original laws are extremely important, various perfect theoretical systems have emerged to summarize general laws, and it is believed that these systems can achieve the ultimate goal of being "universally applicable." Hegel's thought system is extremely complete, and even Eugen Dühring, the protagonist of Against Dühring, arrogantly believed his philosophy could "end" all intellectual problems. In reality, each system has its own historical context and assumptions, and they are constantly evolving and changing. As a result, a system may be stripped of its theoretical premises by reality as soon as it is born, leading to absurd outcomes. Real life has always been ahead of theoretical research, which is a helpless interpretation of the saying "Theory is gray, but the tree of life is evergreen."
In today's world, humanity is undergoing a phase of civilizational transformation, with rapidly evolving technological breakthroughs constantly undermining the foundations of existing civilizations. For millennia, humans have believed in causal relationships in development, but in the subatomic world, the concept of causality no longer exists—only possibilities. The weight of historical experience and original laws is declining in analyzing reality and predicting the future, which is a rather helpless trend. Yet, this helplessness is the prerequisite for the great progress of world civilization, requiring humanity to change perspectives and adopt new ways of thinking to understand and transform the world. If we continue to guide practice according to the old rules, we may repeat the story of "marking the boat while the sword is lost." "If you don't change your mindset, you'll have to change your position." For a nation, this means being marginalized, with national strategies constrained by others. Without a cultural revolution, competition among enterprises, ethnic groups, and nations can only remain at the existing level. Major breakthroughs are unlikely to occur. If we must talk about history and original laws, we can only conclude that all successful individuals are revolutionaries, with their essential characteristic being the negation of history, the courage to transcend, and the use of specificity to break through the constraints of original laws. Nations that fit this description have a culture marked by "Nebula," emphasizing collision, conflict, expansion, negation, and a future-oriented approach with exploration and conquest of the unknown as the guiding principle. They are less influenced by historical sedimentation or selectively accept historical experiences. The most prominent of such nations is that they are "carnivorous," acting as predators, with a cautious yet aggressive mindset, always proactive, concerned only with eating and being eaten, and their actions are primarily to fight or flee. The embodiment of this description in reality is the United States, one of the most successful nations to date. Its success lies in its lack of "roots" (short history, absorbing the essence of European civilization while discarding the dross). Currently, American culture is embarking on a "root-seeking journey," i.e., after normalizing and fixing its own experience, it attempts to "format" other cultures. For example, the "Washington Consensus" serves as a major tool for the United States to format the world, and it is also a sign of the "rooting" of American culture. However, the wise minds in American society are also reflecting and proposing suggestions to ensure vitality, such as Joseph Nye's "soft power," Zbigniew Brzezinski's "great choice," and Samuel Huntington's "Who Are We?"
Contrasting the "Nebula Culture" is the "Root Culture," which is more familiar to us. The mindset of this culture's carriers resembles that of herbivores, focusing on only one thing: whether they are being eaten. If they are, they flee; if not, they coexist peacefully. They are generally passive and do not take the initiative to attack others. The fundamental reason lies in the fact that "Root Culture" values historical sedimentation, enjoys finding practical justifications in history, and is fond of arguing and debating, leading to internal conflicts rather than the ability to "go out" and consider "what lies beyond the horizon." They adhere to historical fundamentalism, believing that original laws can solve everything, and as long as they constantly reflect and improve their cultivation, they can "govern the country and pacify the world," thereby tending toward conservatism and closure, taking pride in building systems. When facing threats from predators, they either avoid them or assimilate them, becoming new branches of the "root." However, for better or worse, not all Chinese think this way. Deng Xiaoping's "Three Theories" (the "cat theory," the "touch theory," and the "no debate theory") intentionally or unintentionally negated the characteristics of "Root Culture":
- The "cat theory" treats all issues with realism, breaking free from historical constraints (e.g., the attitude toward "two certainties," the belief that practice is the sole criterion for truth, and the negation of class struggle by "one center and two basic points").
- The "touch theory" reflects the principle of exploration over system-building.
- The "no debate theory" gives space for innovation, encouraging trial and error, acting first and then defining, not concerned with whether words and actions have historical backing or align with the spirit of literature.
It is precisely this "rebellious" spirit within the "Root Culture" society that brought about China's achievements in the past two decades of reform and achieved the purpose of "liberating the mind," enabling the Chinese people to create an "economic miracle." However, this subtle, forward-thinking awareness has not shaken the cultural circles, making people realize that cultural figures should add value, following Deng Xiaoping's ideas to provide soil and cultural foundations for innovative society.
The basic characteristics of the 21st century can be summarized as follows: the marginal utility of original laws is declining, the premises of traditional culture are being stripped away, "atypical" changes are becoming the trend, and unrestrained innovation is flourishing. In this environment, the core of enhancing national competitiveness lies in cultural revolution and transformation, i.e., shifting from "Root Culture" to "Nebula Culture," and putting "innovation as the soul of the nation" into practice. This transformation is bound to be long and painful, and without several major setbacks and trials, it is difficult to achieve an authentic consensus. The collective in the East Asian region, under the influence of "Root Culture," is currently plagued by historical issues, with emotions growing increasingly agitated and attitudes more resolute. Koreans have even resorted to self-immolation and collective finger-cutting to express their feelings. Reality does not align with the historical logic of regional development. The emergence of the European Union undoubtedly provides a new approach, but the cultural collisions in East Asia have not yet gone through the "eighty-one trials" and cannot yet enjoy the "blessing."