On Polarisation and the Rise of China

David Murrin is the author of Breaking the Code of History, the culmination
of decades of personal research across a wide range of disciplines. David
compellingly argues that human behaviour is not random, but determined by
specific, quantifiable and predictable patterns fuelled by our need to survive
and prosper. He has called this cycle The Five Stages of Empire, which due to
its fractal nature is applicable to empires, all the way down to the cycle of the
individual. According to David, to resolve the issues confronting us today we
cannot merely study the past. The human race will need to understand this
precise algorithm of behaviour that has caused us to re-enact the same
destructive cycles in ever-greater magnitudes, in order to change our future.
He is also a Global Fellow at PS21.

I. Context
At a time when the rise of China is about to enter a new phase with an overt
locking of horns with America, it seems appropriate to examine the
polarisation process that China has been undergoing and its implications for
nations onto whom it is focused. Before we do that it is important to remind
ourselves of how the polarisation process operates.
In Breaking the Code of History we have explained that in physics, the term
'polarisation' denotes the condition by which the oscillation of certain types of
wave can be oriented on the same plane. Individuals, cultures and empires
can be similarly polarised: that is, they can define their values unanimously
and cohesively, bonding as a single society and focusing their energies
against a perceived threat from a competing system. Competition can bind a
group by leading it to establish a common goal.
Polarisation can act as a positive force that is expressed, for example,
through community self-improvement or in team-based contexts, such as
sports. However, as competition increases between two groups, withdrawal

from these amicable relations becomes more pronounced, and a hardening of

differences leads to inevitable conflict. This process occurs at the individual
level as well as the group level, and most people will have experienced it in
one form or another. Polarisation manifesting at the level of nations and
empires leads to war, with the collective character becoming more extreme
or fundamentalist in its values. In the process, killing other human beings
becomes justifiable because they (the opposition) embrace values that are
anathema: they are 'the enemy' and no longer viewed as human.
The long-term memory of a collective can be highly selective, consigning
some parts of its history to oblivion and holding on to others for centuries,
furthering the group's sense of identity and purpose. It generally achieves
this by feeding on the darker aspects of the collective memory, highlighting
the enemy's despicable characteristics and emphasing fear and revenge to
ensure that it has a decisive advantage.
The most pronounced effects of polarisation are found in nations that are
ascending the five stages of Empire curve, i.e. in late regionalisation and
ascension to empire phases of the curve. An example that rings clearly in
history is the relationship between Prussia and France in the Napoleonic Wars
(1803-1815). In 1806, the Prussian army was humiliated by France. Some
measure of revenge was enacted by Prussia on the retreating French after the
Battle of Waterloo in 1815. In the negotiations leading up to the subsequent
Treaty of Frankfurt (1871) the Prussians wanted to punish the French by
taking control of the Alsace and Lorraine territories. However, more evenhanded and wise British intervention blocked this approach seeking a strong
France that would balance other continental powers. Prussia, however, never
forgot and continued to encourage the memory of 1806 to justify and focus it
actions during the 1870 Franco-Prussian War where they were victorious and
annexed the territory of Alsace-Lorraine.
Thus, the 1806 epicenter of polarisation for Germany sounds very similar to
the Japanese Nanking Massacre (also called the Rape of Nanking when in the
Second Sino-Japanese War soldiers of the Imperial Japanese Army murdered
an estimated 40,000 to over 300,000 Chinese civilians and disarmed
combatants) for the Chinese, who are in a similar expanding state. Question
is: is this process inevitable?
II. China and Japan

So how could Japan attempt to defuse the primary polarisation effects from
China caused by their past actions? One of the key focuses for recent Chinese

anger has been the visits by three of Prime Minister Shinzo Abes Cabinet
ministers to Yasukuni Shrine, a national Japanese Shinto shrine that houses
the souls as Kami of the dead who served the Emperor during wars from
1867 to 1951. Enshrinement under the Shinto faith typically carries
absolution of earthly deeds, which is relevant as there are 2,466,532 people
contained in the shrine's Book of Souls, of which 1,068 were convicted of war
crimes by a post World War II court. Of those, 14 are convicted Class A war
criminals ("crime against peace") as found by the war crimes tribunals or
IMTFE (International Military Tribunal for the Far East) that comprised the
victors of World War II.

It should be said that there has been considerable doubt about the method of
information collection used by the IMTFE, the so called "Best Evidence Rule"
that allowed simple hearsay with no secondary support to be entered against
the accused. As a consequence, the court could well have enacted an invalid
form of victors justice due to the significant procedural flaws which gave
many Japanese people a reason to believe that the convicted were not war
criminals. Nevertheless, there can be no doubt that by Western standards
Japanese atrocities were prolific during the period of hostilities and that as a
nation their armed services manifested many more than 1,068 war criminals.
As comment aside, I am sure that the Allies would have had their fair share
too, as would have the Chinese Forces.

Irrespective of the validity of the convictions, with only 0.04% of the souls in
the shrine being convicted war criminals, the Chinese propaganda machine
has been hard at work using the visits of the Japanese cabinet ministers as an
example of unapologetic behaviour. Indeed visiting officials do so as
individuals rather than as officials, due to the formal separation of the State
from the Shinto religion.

So what could Japan do to reduce Chinese anger? Firstly, to make an official

apology for Japanese actions during the war with China. The second might be
to find a way to separate the souls of the convicted war criminals from the
remainder. However, as they without doubt believed that they were serving
the emperor through their actions this might be very hard to ask for the
Japanese culture to accept. More importantly, it will be viewed as weakness

by the Chinese at a deep level and only encourage them further to find
another polarisation process to catalyse their population against Japan.

Sadly, however, from the extensive study of the five stages of empire (i.e.
phase of expansion to empire), such polarisation dynamics are always driven
by the expanding and aggressive nation who is looking for an excuse to
justify their national agenda of expansion and needs to polarise its people to
serve the collective cause. Thus I am of the opinion that Chinas march on the
road to war is almost unstoppable, and even if the contentious topic of visits
to the Yasukuni Shrine were to be resolved, another one would be found to
substitute the Chinese purpose. In response, we can expect a secondary
defensive polarisation from Japan which is but a natural reaction to the
primary polarisation from China. Notably, the process will only abate when
the impulsive primary polarisation process stops, which currently seems
unlikely.
III. Remembering a time when China and America had a common
cause

The polarisation process between China and America is now well underway,
with the primary energy of China now manifesting a secondary defensive
response from America. In all probability, this clash will escalate, but that
being said, every attempt should be made to inhibit this process and a good
place to start was a time when the two nations shared a common cause in
WW2.
With respect to a better understanding of WW2 and the ramifications of the
Chinese-Japanese conflict upon America there are a few key points that
Americans and Chinese should remember that hark back to the time when
the two nations shared a common cause as allies. Could it be possible to
lower the current rising temperature levels between these great powers by
reminding the Chinese of this phase of friendship?
1. China was weak at the time as it was preoccupied with its own civil war
between the communists and nationalists, and it was into that crack that the
Japanese launched themselves, so to some extent China has some
responsibility for making itself vulnerable.
2. Japans invasion of Manchuria on 18 September 1931 clearly demonstrated
its expansionary objectives which were further clarified in 1937 with full on

battles between the Japanese and Chinese. By March 1941 the Americans
were clearly supporting the Chinese with the Lend-Lease program and
embargos on Japan that in the months ahead tightened the flow of resources.
Next came America to impose sanction on Japan which then forced them to
attack Pearl Harbour.
3. The Chinese war against Japan absorbed massive resources and some 70%
of all Japanese casualties were on mainland China. In that regard, China acted
in a similar fashion to Russia in a role that absorbed valuable manpower and
resources that otherwise would have been fighting US forces. This vital role
has not been given enough credit, as has not the price the Chinese paid
during that period and the beneficial effect it had on the American Pacific
campaign.
To reduce tensions perhaps the West should recognise and celebrate the
common cause of WW2 in an attempt to reduce the current building friction
between East and West.
An earlier version of this piece appeared on DavidMurrin.co.uk on September
14, 2015.
PS21 is a non-national, non-ideological, non-governmental organization. All
views expressed are the authors own.