Philosophies that Separate Two Worlds

Chinese philosophy is rooted in a holistic worldview that perceives the universe as an interconnected whole rather than a collection of isolated parts. It holds that contradiction is inherent in all things, as every entity is composed of two opposing aspects—male and female, yin and yang, mountain and river, right and wrong, beauty and ugliness, fortune and misfortune. These forces do not merely oppose; they intertwine, coexist, and form a dynamic equilibrium. They are complementary, interdependent, mutually sustaining, and indispensable.

Harmony arises when these opposites are in balance; when that balance is disturbed, harmony dissolves. Thus, Chinese philosophy emphasizes the unity within contradiction and advocates the doctrine of the mean—a path of moderation and integration—as a means to sustain harmony between opposing forces.

Within this framework, human life is not viewed through the lens of individualism, but through a deep commitment to collective well-being. While people have different interests and positions, cooperation and communal flourishing take precedence over personal ambition. This philosophy emphasizes collective harmony in diversity and seeking common ground while reserving differences. At its core, Chinese thought affirms unity, balance, and peaceful coexistence—favoring collectivism over individualism, collaboration over conflict, and mutual benefit over the defeat of adversaries.

The well-being of society is placed above individual gain, with social harmony upheld through the cultivation of public morality. Human rights are understood not merely as personal entitlements, but as responsibilities toward the collective—aimed at securing safe, equitable, and harmonious conditions for all. While Chinese law protects individual freedoms, including the right to pursue wealth within legal bounds, it also places limits on the unchecked influence of special interests to safeguard the broader interests of the people and the integrity of society (see Understanding China: Geography, Confucianism, and Chinese-Style Modernization).

Economically, China promotes the vision of “common prosperity” through a hybrid model that integrates state-owned enterprises, private ventures, and market mechanisms. This system encourages individual initiative while ensuring that personal success aligns with public welfare. The state plays a crucial role in regulating capital to prevent it from undermining social equity and long-term stability.

Politically, China stresses the central role of the state in uniting the nation, managing differences, protecting the vulnerable, investing in infrastructure, and providing public goods. It adheres to the principles of democratic centralism and national cohesion, rejecting factionalism, partisanship and decentralization. Chinese democracy—often described as “people’s democracy” and “whole-process democracy”—is consultative and consensus-driven, contrasting sharply with the adversarial nature of many Western electoral systems; it involves citizens in policymaking, implementation, and oversight, ensuring that public decisions reflect broad consultation and careful deliberation. By minimizing partisan strife, Chinese governance aims to foster shared prosperity, social harmony, and egalitarian development.

On the global stage, China upholds five guiding principles: mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, non-aggression, non-interference, equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful coexistence. It advocates for international cooperation, peaceful development, and a shared future for humanity marked by global prosperity and mutual respect.

In contrast, Western philosophy reflects an atomistic worldview, portraying the universe as a constellation of self-contained entities. Rooted in individualism, it regards human beings as autonomous actors driven by survival instinct and self-interest—a perspective shaped in part by Darwinian concepts of the “struggle for existence” and “survival of the fittest.” This outlook fosters a “law of the jungle” mentality, where domination and competition are seen as necessary for survival and success (see Darwinism vs. Confucianism). Western culture tends to prioritize self-interest, personal achievements, and strategic advantage, frequently at the expense of collective well-being and ethical responsibility. Its human rights rhetoric is hypocritical. While professing to promote universal freedom, it largely serves the interests of a privileged minority, enabling them to defeat the disadvantaged majority and dominate legislation, the economy, media, military, and foreign policy to their own benefit.

Economically, Western nations champion unrestrained capitalism, driven by competition and self-interest. While this approach may spur short-term growth, it often results in rampant inequality, unchecked greed, and systemic injustice. Capital gains precedence over national welfare, benefitting only a small elite at the expense of broader society. The result is that the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and for most people, "the pursuit of happiness" has become an illusion. The prioritization of profit over production inevitably leads to the hollowing out of the economy, eventually triggering systemic crises (see America Is in Big Trouble).

Politically, this narrow perspective that prioritizes micro-gain over macro-interests and emphasizes zero-sum victory over mutual benefit has plunged Western politics into the quagmire of power struggles, exacerbating social fragmentation, polarization, and extremism. Despite formal democratic structures, these systems can devolve into political theater, rife with empty promises, ideological extremes, and sensationalism. Politicians, frequently funded by special interests, tend to serve their donors more than the public, reducing the role of voters to a periodic ballot with little real influence (see Democracy vs. Plutocracy).

In international affairs, Western powers often adopt a hegemonic posture, relying on tactics such as divide-and-conquer, military interventions, sanctions, and regime change. These actions have destabilized regions, perpetuated global conflict, and undermined prospects for lasting peace. The success of the West historically hinges on the conquest, colonization, genocide, exploitation, and plunder of weaker nations.

For a long time, the Chinese struggled to comprehend Western behaviors, yet they have now come to understand its underlying logic. Unless Western plutocrats alter their philosophical outlook, global peace remains elusive. This sentiment was succinctly expressed by the Chinese delegation during the Sino-US talks in Alaska: "We overestimated your integrity and assumed you would adhere to basic diplomatic norms. We must clarify our stance: You lack the authority to assert dominance over China." Despite the potential dangers inherent in their worldview, Western plutocrats are unlikely to relinquish it. They view China from their own perspective, assuming that once China becomes stronger, it will treat other countries the same way the West once did. It may require the collapse of the existing paradigm before humanity can aspire to construct a new world.

Thankfully, it becomes increasingly clear which philosophy holds more promise for humanity. As the world undergoes profound transformation, a new possibility is beginning to emerge. The rise of China and the relative decline of the West have given the Global South renewed hope. Many now glimpse the possibility of a new world order—one grounded in civilized values, peaceful coexistence, mutual respect, equality, fairness, justice, and win-win cooperation. This stands in stark contrast to the existing system, dominated by barbarism, self-interest, inequality, exploitation, and aggression (see Pluralism vs. Monism).

Democracy vs. Plutocracy

American political thought is fundamentally atomistic, rooted in the belief that individuals are autonomous beings endowed with inalienable rights to pursue their own self-interest. This philosophical foundation normalizes intense competition, where a few emerge as winners while the majority are left behind. Those who succeed in this system often consolidate their power by forming political parties, which claim to represent the public but primarily compete for influence and control.

Elections serve as the formal mechanism through which these parties alternate power. Over time, practices such as political donations, lobbying, and media campaigning have been redefined as forms of free speech, allowing those with greater resources to dominate the political arena. As a result, elections become increasingly ideological and media-driven, shaped by those who have the means to sway public opinion. Ultimately, this dynamic fosters a political landscape in which policies tend to favor the wealthy, deepening social and economic inequality.

With elections increasingly vulnerable to financial influence, misinformation, and character attacks, American politics has become deeply contentious. Elected officials often prioritize performative rhetoric and media attention over effective governance, focusing more on pleasing donors and securing re-election than advancing the public good. The frequent shifts in party control lead to erratic policy reversals, undermining long-term planning and institutional stability. Each administration tends to overspend, accumulate debt, and resort to printing money to inflate short-term approval—leaving the economic consequences to future governments. Meanwhile, partisan gridlock paralyzes decision-making and intensifies social division.

Despite these dysfunctions, many Americans still regard the current system as the only legitimate form of democracy. In practice, however, the U.S. political system operates more as a partisan democracy than a people’s democracy. Increasingly, scholars argue that it has morphed into a plutocracy—rule by the wealthy and well-connected. Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz famously characterized the United States as a nation “of the 1%, by the 1%, and for the 1%.” Backed by powerful special interests, political elites often sideline the needs and voices of the broader population.

The consequences of this distorted system are stark. The U.S. has the highest levels of inequality among developed nations, and during the COVID-19 pandemic, it suffered a death toll over 170 times higher than China’s and an infection rate 1,600 times greater. Decades of financial mismanagement have pushed the national debt beyond $30 trillion, much of it channeled into private contractors, defense budgets, and corporate subsidies. Meanwhile, deep-rooted social problems—ranging from racial conflict and poverty to drug addiction and gun violence—continue to plague the nation.

With less than a quarter of the population of China or India, the U.S. nonetheless has the world’s largest prison population. Its healthcare system is the most expensive globally, yet millions remain uninsured or underinsured. Retirement ages have steadily climbed, placing increasing burdens on the elderly. According to the U.S. Life Insurance Guide, the average retirement age is 67.9 for men and 66.5 for women, compared to China’s 60 for men, 55 for women. Public education is in decline, infrastructure is aging, and the country has been at war for 229 of its 245-year history. These conflicts, often justified in the name of “American values,” perpetuate high military spending, weapons exports, and global dominance—primarily serving entrenched economic and political interests.

Although this system is labeled a democracy, the average American has increasingly little influence over the decisions that shape their daily lives.

In contrast, Chinese political thought is fundamentally holistic, emphasizing the interdependence of individuals within the broader social fabric. Human rights in China are framed in terms of collective well-being rather than individual autonomy. These rights encompass not only personal freedom but also values such as coexistence, equality, cooperation, and social harmony. Whereas American thought tends to view individuals as independent actors pursuing self-interest, Chinese thought sees people as intrinsically connected, with mutual obligations to family, community, and society. Rooted in Confucian tradition, this perspective prioritizes ethical behavior, consensus-building, and the pursuit of communal interests as essential to maintaining social stability and order. (See Understanding China: Geography, Confucianism, and Chinese-Style Modernization.)

China adopts a model of people’s democracy, prioritizing collective governance over partisan competition. While individual interests vary, leadership is expected to represent the broader will of the population. With a 5,000-year tradition of governance, China has historically recognized both the risks of factionalism and the importance of unified political leadership. The Communist Party of China (CPC), comprising nearly 100 million members, positions national interest above partisan agendas. Leadership selection occurs every five years through the CPC National Congress and the National People’s Congress, with candidates evaluated based on character, competence, and proven achievement, rather than rhetoric or ideology. Policy development involves extensive research, public consultation, and meticulous planning to balance short-term priorities with long-term national goals. Unlike the U.S., where governance often reflects special interest influence, China’s system seeks to foster a just and harmonious society rooted in shared prosperity. Institutional safeguards—including collective leadership, term limits, anti-corruption measures, public supervision, and internal discipline—aim to enhance accountability and prevent authoritarianism.

Differences in human rights perspectives shape how each country approaches key issues. In the U.S., COVID-19 precautions were largely seen as a matter of personal choice, with individual liberty prioritized over collective protection. In contrast, China placed public health first, with temporary restrictions widely accepted for the greater good. Similarly, Americans often view gun control as an infringement on personal freedom, whereas the Chinese regard strict firearm laws as essential for public safety. In the U.S., business regulation is frequently seen as a constraint on economic freedom, while in China, such oversight is viewed as necessary to reduce inequality. Intellectual property in the U.S. is tightly protected, often limit accessibility and innovation, while China promotes shared technological advancement to accelerate national development. And while the U.S. frequently invokes individual rights to justify foreign interventions, China considers such actions—including the instigation of color revolutions and conflicts under the banner of democracy—as violations of national sovereignty and human rights.

No political system is immune to failure. History teaches that if a nation fails to confront its ideological, institutional, and systemic flaws, decline is inevitable. The dominance of special interests—such as corporate lobbies and the military-industrial complex—erodes democratic legitimacy and public trust. Drawing from China’s long history, the collapse of a democracy under the weight of corruption and plutocracy may take less than three centuries (see The Vicious Circle of Regime Change). This is why Chinese political culture values collectivism and egalitarianism over individualism. As China rises, Confucian values are poised to play a larger role in shaping global political thought—an evolution worth noting and, perhaps, celebrating. (See Pluralism vs. Monism.)