Understanding the rise of China | Martin Jacques

Understanding the rise of China | Martin Jacques

The world is changing with really remarkable speed. If you look at the chart at the top here, you’ll see that in 2025, these Goldman Sachs projections suggest that the Chinese economy will be almost the same size as the American economy. And if you look at the chart for 2050, it’s projected that the Chinese economy will be twice the size of the American economy, and the Indian economy will be almost the same size as the American economy. And we should bear in mind here that these projections were drawn up before the Western financial crisis. A couple of weeks ago, I was looking at the latest projection by BNP Paribas for when China will have a larger economy than the United States. Goldman Sachs projected 2027. The post-crisis projection is 2020. That’s just a decade away. China is going to change the world in two fundamental respects. First of all, it’s a huge developing country with a population of 1.3 billion people, which has been growing for over 30 years at around 10 percent a year. And within a decade, it will have the largest economy in the world. Never before in the modern era has the largest economy in the world been that of a developing country, rather than a developed country. Secondly, for the first time in the modern era, the dominant country in the world — which I think is what China will become — will be not from the West and from very, very different civilizational roots. Now, I know it’s a widespread assumption in the West that as countries modernize, they also westernize. This is an illusion. It’s an assumption that modernity is a product simply of competition, markets and technology. It is not. It is also shaped equally by history and culture. China is not like the West, and it will not become like the West. It will remain in very fundamental respects very different. Now the big question here is obviously, how do we make sense of China? How do we try to understand what China is? And the problem we have in the West at the moment, by and large, is that the conventional approach is that we understand it really in Western terms, using Western ideas. We can’t. Now I want to offer you three building blocks for trying to understand what China is like, just as a beginning. The first is this: that China is not really a nation-state. Okay, it’s called itself a nation-state for the last hundred years, but everyone who knows anything about China knows it’s a lot older than this. This was what China looked like with the victory of the Qin Dynasty in 221 B.C. at the end of the warring-state period — the birth of modern China. And you can see it against the boundaries of modern China. Or immediately afterward, the Han Dynasty, still 2,000 years ago. And you can see already it occupies most of what we now know as Eastern China, which is where the vast majority of Chinese lived then and live now. Now what is extraordinary about this is, what gives China its sense of being China, what gives the Chinese the sense of what it is to be Chinese, comes not from the last hundred years, not from the nation-state period, which is what happened in the West, but from the period, if you like, of the civilization-state. I’m thinking here, for example, of customs like ancestral worship, of a very distinctive notion of the state, likewise, a very distinctive notion of the family, social relationships like guanxi, Confucian values and so on. These are all things that come from the period of the civilization-state. In other words, China, unlike the Western states and most countries in the world, is shaped by its sense of civilization, its existence as a civilization-state, rather than as a nation-state. And there’s one other thing to add to this, and that is this: Of course we know China’s big, huge, demographically and geographically, with a population of 1.3 billion people. What we often aren’t really aware of is the fact that China is extremely diverse and very pluralistic, and in many ways very decentralized. You can’t run a place on this scale simply from Beijing, even though we think this to be the case. It’s never been the case. So this is China, a civilization-state, rather than a nation-state. And what does it mean? Well, I think it has all sorts of profound implications. I’ll give you two quick ones. The first is that the most important political value for the Chinese is unity, is the maintenance of Chinese civilization. You know, 2,000 years ago, Europe: breakdown — the fragmentation of the Holy Roman Empire. It divided, and it’s remained divided ever since. China, over the same time period, went in exactly the opposite direction, very painfully holding this huge civilization, civilization-state, together. The second is maybe more prosaic, which is Hong Kong. Do you remember the handover of Hong Kong by Britain to China in 1997? You may remember what the Chinese constitutional proposition was. One country, two systems. And I’ll lay a wager that barely anyone in the West believed them. “Window dressing. When China gets its hands on Hong Kong, that won’t be the case.” Thirteen years on, the political and legal system in Hong Kong is as different now as it was in 1997. We were wrong. Why were we wrong? We were wrong because we thought, naturally enough, in nation-state ways. Think of German unification, 1990. What happened? Well, basically the East was swallowed by the West. One nation, one system. That is the nation-state mentality. But you can’t run a country like China, a civilization-state, on the basis of one civilization, one system. It doesn’t work. So actually the response of China to the question of Hong Kong — as it will be to the question of Taiwan — was a natural response: one civilization, many systems. Let me offer you another building block to try and understand China — maybe not sort of a comfortable one. The Chinese have a very, very different conception of race to most other countries. Do you know, of the 1.3 billion Chinese, over 90 percent of them think they belong to the same race, the Han? Now, this is completely different from the world’s [other] most populous countries. India, the United States, Indonesia, Brazil — all of them are multiracial. The Chinese don’t feel like that. China is only multiracial really at the margins. So the question is, why? Well the reason, I think, essentially is, again, back to the civilization-state. A history of at least 2,000 years, a history of conquest, occupation, absorption, assimilation and so on, led to the process by which, over time, this notion of the Han emerged — of course, nurtured by a growing and very powerful sense of cultural identity. Now the great advantage of this historical experience has been that, without the Han, China could never have held together. The Han identity has been the cement which has held this country together. The great disadvantage of it is that the Han have a very weak conception of cultural difference. They really believe in their own superiority, and they are disrespectful of those who are not. Hence their attitude, for example, to the Uyghurs and to the Tibetans. Or let me give you my third building block, the Chinese state. Now the relationship between the state and society in China is very different from that in the West. Now we in the West overwhelmingly seem to think — in these days at least — that the authority and legitimacy of the state is a function of democracy. The problem with this proposition is that the Chinese state enjoys more legitimacy and more authority amongst the Chinese than is true with any Western state. And the reason for this is because — well, there are two reasons, I think. And it’s obviously got nothing to do with democracy, because in our terms the Chinese certainly don’t have a democracy. And the reason for this is, firstly, because the state in China is given a very special — it enjoys a very special significance as the representative, the embodiment and the guardian of Chinese civilization, of the civilization-state. This is as close as China gets to a kind of spiritual role. And the second reason is because, whereas in Europe and North America, the state’s power is continuously challenged — I mean in the European tradition, historically against the church, against other sectors of the aristocracy, against merchants and so on — for 1,000 years, the power of the Chinese state has not been challenged. It’s had no serious rivals. So you can see that the way in which power has been constructed in China is very different from our experience in Western history. The result, by the way, is that the Chinese have a very different view of the state. Whereas we tend to view it as an intruder, a stranger, certainly an organ whose powers need to be limited or defined and constrained, the Chinese don’t see the state like that at all. The Chinese view the state as an intimate — not just as an intimate actually, as a member of the family — not just in fact as a member of the family, but as the head of the family, the patriarch of the family. This is the Chinese view of the state — very, very different to ours. It’s embedded in society in a different kind of way to what is the case in the West. And I would suggest to you that actually what we are dealing with here, in the Chinese context, is a new kind of paradigm, which is different from anything we’ve had to think about in the past. Know that China believes in the market and the state. I mean, Adam Smith, already writing in the late 18th century, said, “The Chinese market is larger and more developed and more sophisticated than anything in Europe.” And, apart from the Mao period, that has remained more or less the case ever since. But this is combined with an extremely strong and ubiquitous state. The state is everywhere in China. I mean, it’s leading firms — many of them are still publicly owned. Private firms, however large they are, like Lenovo, depend in many ways on state patronage. Targets for the economy and so on are set by the state. And the state, of course, its authority flows into lots of other areas — as we are familiar with — with something like the one-child policy. Moreover, this is a very old state tradition, a very old tradition of statecraft. I mean, if you want an illustration of this, the Great Wall is one. But this is another, this is the Grand Canal, which was constructed in the first instance in the fifth century B.C. and was finally completed in the seventh century A.D. It went for 1,114 miles, linking Beijing with Hangzhou and Shanghai. So there’s a long history of extraordinary state infrastructural projects in China, which I suppose helps us to explain what we see today, which is something like the Three Gorges Dam and many other expressions of state competence within China. So there we have three building blocks for trying to understand the difference that is China — the civilization-state, the notion of race and the nature of the state and its relationship to society. And yet we still insist, by and large, in thinking that we can understand China by simply drawing on Western experience, looking at it through Western eyes, using Western concepts. If you want to know why we unerringly seem to get China wrong — our predictions about what’s going to happen to China are incorrect — this is the reason. Unfortunately, I think, I have to say that I think attitude towards China is that of a kind of little Westerner mentality. It’s kind of arrogant. It’s arrogant in the sense that we think that we are best, and therefore we have the universal measure. And secondly, it’s ignorant. We refuse to really address the issue of difference. You know, there’s a very interesting passage in a book by Paul Cohen, the American historian. And Paul Cohen argues that the West thinks of itself as probably the most cosmopolitan of all cultures. But it’s not. In many ways, it’s the most parochial, because for 200 years, the West has been so dominant in the world that it’s not really needed to understand other cultures, other civilizations. Because, at the end of the day, it could, if necessary by force, get its own way. Whereas those cultures — virtually the rest of the world, in fact, which have been in a far weaker position, vis-a-vis the West — have been thereby forced to understand the West, because of the West’s presence in those societies. And therefore, they are, as a result, more cosmopolitan in many ways than the West. I mean, take the question of East Asia. East Asia: Japan, Korea, China, etc. — a third of the world’s population lives there. Now the largest economic region in the world. And I’ll tell you now, that East Asianers, people from East Asia, are far more knowledgeable about the West than the West is about East Asia. Now this point is very germane, I’m afraid, to the present. Because what’s happening? Back to that chart at the beginning, the Goldman Sachs chart. What is happening is that, very rapidly in historical terms, the world is being driven and shaped, not by the old developed countries, but by the developing world. We’ve seen this in terms of the G20 usurping very rapidly the position of the G7, or the G8. And there are two consequences of this. First, the West is rapidly losing its influence in the world. There was a dramatic illustration of this actually a year ago — Copenhagen, climate change conference. Europe was not at the final negotiating table. When did that last happen? I would wager it was probably about 200 years ago. And that is what is going to happen in the future. And the second implication is that the world will inevitably, as a consequence, become increasingly unfamiliar to us, because it’ll be shaped by cultures and experiences and histories that we are not really familiar with, or conversant with. And at last, I’m afraid — take Europe; America is slightly different — but Europeans by and large, I have to say, are ignorant, are unaware about the way the world is changing. Some people — I’ve got an English friend in China, and he said, “The continent is sleepwalking into oblivion.” Well, maybe that’s true, maybe that’s an exaggeration. But there’s another problem which goes along with this — that Europe is increasingly out of touch with the world — and that is a sort of loss of a sense of the future. I mean, Europe once, of course, once commanded the future in its confidence. Take the 19th century, for example. But this, alas, is no longer true. If you want to feel the future, if you want to taste the future, try China — there’s old Confucius. This is a railway station the likes of which you’ve never seen before. It doesn’t even look like a railway station. This is the new [Wuhan] railway station for the high-speed trains. China already has a bigger network than any other country in the world and will soon have more than all the rest of the world put together. Or take this: now this is an idea, but it’s an idea to be tried out shortly in a suburb of Beijing. Here you have a megabus, on the upper deck carries about 2,000 people. It travels on rails down a suburban road, and the cars travel underneath it. And it does speeds of up to about 100 miles an hour. Now this is the way things are going to move, because China has a very specific problem, which is different from Europe and different from the United States: China has huge numbers of people and no space. So this is a solution to a situation where China’s going to have many, many, many cities over 20 million people. Okay, so how would I like to finish? Well, what should our attitude be towards this world that we see very rapidly developing before us? I think there will be good things about it and there will be bad things about it. But I want to argue, above all, a big-picture positive for this world. For 200 years, the world was essentially governed by a fragment of the human population. That’s what Europe and North America represented. The arrival of countries like China and India — between them 38 percent of the world’s population — and others like Indonesia and Brazil and so on, represent the most important single act of democratization in the last 200 years. Civilizations and cultures, which had been ignored, which had no voice, which were not listened to, which were not known about, will have a different sort of representation in this world. As humanists, we must welcome, surely, this transformation, and we will have to learn about these civilizations. This big ship here was the one sailed in by Zheng He in the early 15th century on his great voyages around the South China Sea, the East China Sea and across the Indian Ocean to East Africa. The little boat in front of it was the one in which, 80 years later, Christopher Columbus crossed the Atlantic. (Laughter) Or, look carefully at this silk scroll made by ZhuZhou in 1368. I think they’re playing golf. Christ, the Chinese even invented golf. Welcome to the future. Thank you. (Applause)

100 thoughts on “Understanding the rise of China | Martin Jacques

  1. I have been hearing Martin Jacques talkign about China's rise for over a decade and he has yet to be right with a vast majority of his predictions regarding China. Secondly, Jacques seriously underestimates the significant flaws that are inherent within China. There are reasons why China has not been able to expand beyond its current borders in its 400+ year history. Reasons such as geography, very limited natural resources, political enslavement of its people (which limits their full potential), overpopulation, and so much more. China will grow but it will not anytime soon, surpass the USA as the world's superpower or become its equal. A vast majority of Chinese are still living under extreme poverty. China also does not hold the world's currency reserve, an incredible advantage that only the United States possesses. Most people do not understand the power of having the world's reserve currency much less comprehend its true power. We could also consider the fact that all of China's technological advances in the past 40 years has come from either being given (so the companies could do business in China) or mostly stolen from the western nations. Modern China is not as innovative as many believe their people to be. Yes, the Chinese are hard-working people, that is for sure but, being out-of-the-box thinking they are not. China needs the USA. The USA doe not need China. The United States can always move its supply chain needs to other SE Asian nations (Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, and Myanmar) and thus critically damage China economic output. This is already underway and the Chinese .leadership sees this happening and they know they cannot stop it from happening. The cost of doing business in China financially, politically, and technologically (retaining and protecting patents) continues to grow dramatically. Hence, Vietnam's sudden growth as a cheap manufacturing place for western nations. Let's not also forget that China has severe limitations on its ability to projects its military power beyond its local region. They are surrounded by American allies such as South Korea, Japan, Australia, and Taiwan. If total war ever did breakout between the USA and China, China would be able to hold out but, only for a little while. Virtually all war stimulated played over the past 20 years show China being the loser. BTW, I do not hate China, I actually appreciate and admire China and its people on many levels and I wish the Chinese people, not the government, that they will one day achieve political freedom and liberties to truly reach their potential because no communist government has ever stood the test of time. They all eventually become corrupt and crumble under their own totalitarian weight. I could go and on but I got other things to do. I hope you all have a terrific day.


  3. No,it`s fake. China is still a developing country, we don`t have human right and democracy. Authoritarian Government. China has 1.4 billion people , per capita wealth is low , we are so poor that we can`t even buy an egg. Chinese people are Living in Misery It`s a terrible country, China is going to Collapse. It`s dangerous because you may be arrested by the CCP, don`t come to China please.

    In fact , it`s the western anti-China media that makes the bias 、hate and Sinophobia.

  4. Western cultural distance from Chinese civilization for thousands of years, yet, nowadays, the growing population of Chinese and Euro, American still has up to learn. Both sides of countries learn lessons from their own ancient histories and tinker and tactics to survives through our ever changing environment issues.

  5. Jacques you have pointed out a real important problem of the western countries, that of looking at other countries through their lens and impose millitary actions when they see signs of rejection..

  6. Well it is all about greed and the one who treats others as equal or the one that benefits from others will win or lead the world.
    The west has now the largest ship, the aircraft carrier and has raised technology to new levels. What was explained were old notions of China and this is why they’re grabbing technologies every where and even geographical dominance or presence with their civilization
    A Chinese in America will halflway always be Chinese whereas a westerner in China is completely mostly converted as Asian
    The presence of Chinese in every continent, the acquisition of property via grab or purchase, it’s people loyalty to home , growth in population while others decreases will all matter

  7. What he talked about how East Asian know more about Western culture and more cosmopolitan than the West, while the West feel like they do not need to know the rest of the world since their cultural influence is still no.1 in the world, etc. reminds me of the Qing China's attitude towards the rest of the world. Karma is coming =)

  8. Please study -YouTube. Pyramids and Credo Mutwa and , Yuval Harari and Albert Pike and 1871 and “It will be done by 2030, and Agenda 21/30/50 On Youtube:

  9. At 18 Martin Jacques joined communist party in UK. No joke. How wonder he has presented a communist regime? and how enthusiastically?

  10. Great speech, but one thing missing is that modern China is always willing to have friendship with other countries as long as they got the chance to do bussiness together, which is hugely different from the western countries who always treat the others as opponent.

    By the way ,the megabus was a fraud, I was quite shame to see that…and maybe because of the crisis, Martin is too pessimistic about the western countries.

  11. 300 billion $ for American Jews from Poland as WWII reparations ???? Mr. Trump – right direction is Berlin, Germany!!! Please, watch this short video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpgkZA5qmu0

  12. The age of Western pirates who lie, cheat, and steal, is coming to an end. China will put them back in their place. Peace to the world. ✌

  13. 台灣的龍應台或是李敖講不出這些有水準的話。中國是文明國家不是西方那種以種族作為基礎的國家。

  14. Probably the best video explanation I've heard about China. Most people do not understand China and its civilization but this video said it perfectly and objectively.

  15. China is a totalitarian communist state pursuing an imperialist policy that will end up creating more enemies than friends. .

  16. Jesus Christ, big presentation about Chinese economic superiority, then Chinese political superiority, and then Chinese technological superiority slipped in at the end…

    And then what comes next? it's the first video with a feature length advert for some useless Rolex western technology…

    It doesn't take a fucking genius to realise that the whole presentation was just an insincere emotional manipulation to get idiots to buy a fucking Rolex

    They almost had me going then but the advert confirmed I was correct

    Anyone who thinks there is something to fear by the Chinese obvious superiority is an ego maniac

    The plan remains the same: create vertical farms so we can continue to house more people, and travel information into space because space is awesome. I should know, I took a ride up there riding on a sea of gnomes with Terrence McKenna

    Oh yeah, and don't buy a Rolex

  17. As a Chinese, I don't quite think it's a conflict between the west and the east or the "rising" of China or something else a lot westerner always concern.

    I mean, it's something that it's supposed to be, people all over the world deserve an advanced, prosperous, safe and strong society. India, SE Asia, South America, Africa, ect all the nations should have this for a better world, in their own ways with their own cultures. This world is big enough for everyone.

  18. I've watched hundreds of ted talks and this is respectfully easily the worst.

    He speaks decently (voice, articulation) but offers few tips, or actual insights like 'this mishap of western understanding is costing the west in this way'. What thesis is he making points for? That China has a history? They're complex and diverse yet support one race? The west is much more diverse in that regard (unless trump has his racist way).
    Didn't mention Chinese issues like wealth per capita, pollution, communism/ corruption, etc. Didn't mention manufacturing, farming, tech development, their economy being the fake product center of the world, cheap human exploitation, etc. Could have even gone into social issues like harvesting organs from peaceful citizens, death penalty, drug charge executions, patriarchy, election rigging, etc.

    I almost feel less informed after watching it. It's like he's giving a book report without reading the book. Respectfully.

  19. Well china is doing many good things…having them " rise" isnt a bad thing…its more like having governments and countries deteriorate or fail to " rise" or even maintain…which can be caused by certain things, in the US case, electing the current president…

  20. Having climate change be called a "hoax" and things like that are terrible…having more " clean coal" its not clean and more natural gas planned to be used…thats very bad..

  21. .its the opposite of what you want…its very ineffective…take solar power…make an array, install it and power is generated near immediately…to get coal or oil, you have to make a drilling platform, drill for it, refine it, transport it, and then use it… and then emissions destroys the environments…So solar power is much more efficient, and wont destroy the environment…but its being " deemed" a "money making hoax"…

  22. And then he engages in " trade wars" with China…which really isnt a war. He claimed China was " spending millions" because of the trade war…but the US is spending billions in subsidies for the farmers who are affected by the trade war…

  23. So its not really a war…its more like the US nudges China(claiming its a beat down) then China lands a massive upper cut, straight to the Jaw…people like the President cant be allowed to be in office…

  24. How? Easy. Treason by US industries, banks and financial system. It has one major flaw. It's tyrannical. Are you asking that we get rid of our Western Democratic, civil and human rights values, in order to better understand it? No you are wrong. Look at what's happening right now in Hong Kong.

  25. With respect , you are mistaken & I'll tell you why : despite the "arrogance" you speak of , the long term benefits of—
    [the rest of this comment has been censored by China. ]

  26. Lots of good points… Just a few remarks though. Its one thing to get from a peasant society to an industrial one. It's another thing to go from an industrial society to a post-modern one though. China will face tremendous challenges. Look at Hong Kong right now, the civil unrest. Look at the heinous pollution in their cities. Look at how impatient the population is growing with high rents and long working hours. Look at demographics, the whole society ageing. Few children being born. Not sure how they will face all this… These are extremely complicated matters that require very intricate and intelligent policies. A few centuries ago, in a similar fashion, experts like this speaker (and everybody else) predicted that Japan would take over the world… "Land of the rising sun". People were afraid, started learning Japanese. But now? It's an old, sluggish economy with an ageing population and zero economic growth for the last ten years. For sure, China will get bigger but it will also reach its limits. The railway station in Guangzhou that the speaker mentions? It is one of the biggest, but also most inefficient ones I've ever seen in my life… Takes hours to get you a ticket. I saw thousands and thousands of people everywhere with fake jobs (standing at the station all day and redundantly showing people where to stand) that will be impossible to maintain in the long term. China has to learn a lot still. They will get there but not as easily as supposed. Once the economy starts slowing down, civil unrest goes up. That might happen sooner than we think.

  27. I see most of the comments here don't show the intelligence or patience to understand the speaker's ideas. Draw their pathetic conclusions from the little they have seen or the highly stereotyped image from the media. When a great power rises, at least has the respect and patience to learn it. Hide in your comfort zone or make retarded comments are not going to help to make you any wiser understanding this culture. The first lesson from Chinese: be humble and attentive!

  28. And have you seen how many Uyghur concentration camps there are in china? Way more than in the rest of the world. Not to mention the great chinese achievement in terms of forced organ harvesting of Falun Gong practitioners. You get like 2000 donated organs and turn that into over 60000 successful transplants. Mindblowing really.

  29. This talk didn't age well – completely wrong about Hong Kong – which suggests he doesn't actually understand China. Also, if you really want to understand China, why not ask an actual Chinese guy?

  30. Weird. I'd think this guy would know that the 'Chinese nationality' was fabricated at the end of Qing Dynasty.
    6:28 tell me again mainland China is respecting Hong Kong's political system? such bullshit.

  31. The missing element — consumers. These projections are based on US consumption— which is going to fail for a host of reasons. Unless China turns into a consumer driven economy v. “Investment” the trends will not last.

  32. It bears remembering that this guy is making some VERY simplistic assumptions, and that he is a lifelong member of the Communist Party.

  33. China will also get alot and i mean alot of old old people and only ½ generation to take care of them. that will cost alot of monye.

  34. The whole one country two systems in HK will not last. China will never allow that in the long run. HK will be reunited with China and integrate into the Chinese gov system in the end. HK people will resist and protest all they want, but it's inevitable.

  35. 中国人的可怕之处不仅在于勤劳,更是博大的智慧文明历史,比如:取长补短,择其善者而从之 其不善者而改之。等等无需熬述。

  36. china is not a democracy and says so. western societies say they are democracies, and are not. are you surprised that china's rulers get more respect?
    the rulers of china have delivered more economic progress than the 'democracies' ever did, and it's widespread. that gets respect.

  37. I doubt his assertion that for thousand years the power of China has been unquestioned, accepted dully by the denizens. Post Opium War there was increasing dissatisfaction over the weak capability of the then existing Qing dynasty which increased the number of supporters of the Komintang party led by Dr Sun Yatsung and eventually the monarchy was overthrown. Please correct me if my claim is wrong.

  38. The world does not understand China’s capacity as a civilization for sacrifice …sometime in frightening drastic, and one could say even wrong-headed ways ( ie cultural revolution), …all for a greater good for unity & self reliance. Say what you will about Mao…facts are facts, but there’s no disputing that he managed to forcibly remove all foreign dominance and aggression visited by 8 western nations on its people.

  39. the West has been engineered, China has not. We have had our culture and lands raped, China has not; since we are shattered its likely they will overtake us.

  40. Profound and illuminating speech. Integration, rather than arrogant discrimination of diversed cultures will be the trend of the future.

  41. 中国政治的对手是所有在坐的各位以及做错了的自己,中国政治是不断改进的,并不是用某一定义可以说明的

  42. – Let's stop thinking about China in western terms…
    * Proceeds to rant in western idealist notions of history *

  43. 6:45 HK showed that "One Country 2 Systems" is a lie by CCCP, particularly Emperor Xi.
    One China is a myth, there are 4 Chinas. And China does not equal CCCP.

  44. Happy for china.
    I know western governments will do their best to destroy it and control it. but i don't think they can. they will end up getting their butts kicked.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *