In October 2010 Jacques Martin explained China. This was published on TED.

com in January 2011 as Understanding the Rise of China. He begins quoting economic projections. China was expected to surpass the US by 2025; doubling it by 2050 according to Goldman Sachs. The financial crisis accelerated this projection by seven years, from 2027 to 2020. Martin attributes this to two aspects. The developing countrys population of 1.3 billion growing at about 10 percent a year for the last 30 and for the first time a non-Western developing country will lead economically. Maritn questions the accepted concept of westernizing as a result of modernization attributing more importance to history and culture. He invites uses a different approach by introducing three building blocks to understand China. To explain the first he says that China has only called itself a nation-state for the last 100 years. Its essence is not comprised by this recent period, but by the civilizaition-state. To clarify this difference, Martin offers two implications. One is unity; the most significant political value is the preservation of Chinas civilization. The second is more abstract, personified in Hong Kong. Using a nation-state framework mindset, phenomenon where one country can exist with two systems is unbelievable. He recalls the West absorbing the East in the 1990 German unification; one civilization, one system. The appearent difference is Hong Kongs political and legal system; one civilization and many systems. Chinas different notion of race in relation to other nations makes this possible; 90% of the 1.3 billion consider being the same Han race. The upside is the sense of unity. The downside is the lack of acceptance, resulting in a sense of superiority. The third is Chinese state. The correlation between the Chinese state and society differs from the West. In the west the authority and legitimacy of the state lies in democracy. This concept lacks validity in China where state is more legitmate and has more authority. Two reasons for this, and neither is based on democracy. First is the Chinese state embodies is seen as the protector of civilization. The second, the States power has not been defied for over 1,000 years. Measuring this against challenges in the West, he concludes that power in China has been solidified in their own way resulting in a different concept of state. The West sees it as a menace whose reach much be watched closely, while in China it is actually seen as the head of family. The relation between market and state is also very different. While they believe in market, the state is very much involved in it. Martin repeats that we cannot pretend to understand China by using Western models and make predictions. He calls this arrogant. Citing Paul Cohen, he calls it ignorant. The West needs not understand other societies since its an economic powerhouse, while these must understand the West. To further illustrate, Martin exemplifies East Asia as the largest population and the biggest economy. This region understands the West way more than the West them. He recalls the opening projections about the worlds economy being championed by developing countries. He foresees two implications, the Wests loss of influence and the world becoming foreign to us. In his opinion this is a good thing, a democratization since countries that had no voice will now have representation.