''Today we can realize three traditions in China. One of them is the tradition, which developed in the last 28 years.... in this tradition the market economy plays the dominant role... it encloses a lot of concepts about individual rights and freedom, too. Another tradition was developed during the era of Mao Zedong. Its most essential aspect was the quest for equality and justice. The third tradition was formed thousands of years ago in the course of the development of the Chinese civilisation. Nowadays this tradition is called Confucianism. In the past we often got the impression that these three traditions are standing in contradiction to each other. In fact, they don't.'' (Gan Yang)

Gan Yuang's statement points out a quite essential aspect of the social dynamics of today's China. In my last blog ''Was Confucius wrong? What is the truth for you?'' I cited one of Confucius' verses which shows how the traditional Chinese thinking was handling conflicts of values. In this entry I explained the background of Confucius' decision to regard filial piety as a higher value than the truth about a fact. Seen with Western eyes this decision is more than surprising, because it opens all doors for being abused for any human interests. In that context it doesn't help much that Confucius was restricting his valuation to a specified case. The human being is a creature which is able to think – but only exceptionally.

In contrast to that the development in the West was strongly dominated by studies about the conditions under which perception and knowledge is possible. From the earliest beginnings during the early times of ancient Greece the dominating question was: How are we able to percept and to know something? From the earliest beginning the Western culture successively developed to a ''culture of questioning''. The answers to these questions were unknown. But the way of questioning was developed to find or at least to approach the answers.

This is totally different to China. Here we have a ''culture of answers''. The questions and methods to answer them have never been in the focus of Chinese thinking. The answers are given already before the methods to investigate them were elaborated. This is like you would try to solve a mathematical equation not by algebraic transformations but by claiming the result.

How can we understand this?

Of the ancient world's major cultures, Chinese culture differs not only in this aspect markedly from the Greece culture. The development of the Greece culture was closely related to the ocean. With the ocean as its backdrop, Athens and other Greece cities and colonies formed an industrial and commercial culture and city-state civilization that were open to the rest of the world never stopping absorbing the fruits of civilization from surrounding regions. Traditional Chinese culture however was influenced by a relatively closed geographical environment. The Chinese culture evolved gradually into an isolated and continuous continental culture with patriarchal or feudal character. For short we can state: In the development of the Chinese culture the exchange with other cultures, with new ideas and thoughts was extremely restricted. If you doubt this then have a closer look at the long times the Indian Buddhism needed to find ground in the Chinese culture and to what extends this original Buddhism was changed in this process. The Chinese culture was an isolated culture – while the Greece cultures were permanently in conflict between each other and with other ideas coming from outside.

It should be clear that this couldn't work well for all times. One day there was the contact to the West – and with this contact the problems arose. But don't let us look at the historical details of that time now. Let us look at today's China. China is huge and powerful country which has the strong will to develop and to lead. Under no circumstances China will accept to maintain in the old backwardness due to old traditions. But due to its tradition China has the surprising ability to combine contradictions. Seen with western eyes it's hard to understand how Confucian, Marxist and capitalistic ideas can be combined. Confucius was a clear Anti-capitalist. Marx was an Anti-capitalist. And Confucius and Marxism are absolutely not compatible. But in China – this doesn't matter!

From my point of view I have just one explanation for this phenomenon: China never developed a methodology in rational analysis. This makes it easy to accept contradictions..... but.... it makes it hard to find out the facts! If you are lead by your interests – then you are blinded by your interest.

This is the crux of the present development in China. China wants to lead and she wants to develop. But this development needs other instruments than those offered by the old Confucian tradition. It needs what is strange in many Asian cultures until now: a sharp analytical mind. It needs openness to the variety of all possible answers. It needs a culture of critics. It needs a culture of questioning! China will not allow any traditionalists to push her back to the times of the ''culture of answers''.

I am not sure in how far it is obvious for you already now: China is in a process of extreme changes. It was not Deng Xiaoping who opened China for the capitalism. It were the intellectuals - the ''free thinkers'' behind him. It were not narrow-minded hangers-on of the Marxist ideology who opened this country. It were people of the think-tanks behind. These intellectuals are today the leaders of China. Since about 3 decades the power of the Chinese intellectuals is continuously growing. Meanwhile the intellectuals form the most influential group in this country lacking any political opposition, any independent union and any public political discussion!

But... as usual there is a big 'but'.... can this last? Can analytical thinking be restricted to the laboratories and universities? Inside you are allowed to think – outside not? Behind the doors of the universities and laboratories you are allowed to practice a ''culture of questioning'' and outside you have to keep quiet?

I would say: No! This might work for a while – but not for all times. It is not surprising that all progress in political questions has its origin within intellectuals. It is not surprising that everywhere (with exception of today's Thailand) movements for democracy have their origin within students and university staff. The engine for any positive political change are the think-tanks where people are allowed to practice unlimited thinking.

Seen from that point I am expecting that China will become the driving engine for incisive political changes in East-Asia. The development will overtake some countries who are trying hard to conserve a backward way of thinking. It is possible that there is a day coming when the leaders of these countries will wake up with the same surprise as the East German leader Erich Honecker did when Gorbatschow told him: ''Who is coming too late – that one will be punished by the life.“