China Rise: A race to the top or bottom and the impact on the world’s players

The rise of China: The impact of winning the highest or lowest competition on global players Introduction China's open reform period is not a blueprint, but based on a progressive and step-by-step approach to reform "Feel the stone river Cross over ". China is still a developing country with many industrial areas. China relies on labor output, but due to this imbalance in development the gap between urban and rural areas is expanding.

China will replace the United States as the world's leading superpower during this century. It has the largest economy in the world (according to specific measurements) and the largest population. According to the Global Language Monitoring Report, "the rise of China" is important news of the 21st century. The political development of China over the past several decades has had a major impact on all countries. Jin Ping recently canceled his term of office and seems to have strongly pushed Marxist influence on his citizens than the last few Chinese rulers. National Broadcasting Corporation recently broadcasted a special five-part program called "Marcus is right", and Communist scholars made a speech on traditional socialist doctrine.

In this article I will explain the modern rise of China and the new role on the world stage seen from the viewpoint of semi-environmental mobility. Unlike the previous debate on the rise of China's hegemonic power, the focus here is on the impact of China's progress in the structure of modern capitalist world economy. What happens if a country like China that occupies nearly 20% of the world's population moves from a neighboring country to a semi-border country in a short time? According to Immanuel Wallerstein, the stratum structure of the world economy is a three-layer structure, the majority of the world's population is at the bottom, the number of middle classes is significantly smaller, and the proportion within the hierarchy is smaller. By examining the global economic stratification from 1990 to 2015, it has been shown that movement to semi - edges in China will change the shape of this three - layer structure greatly.

Looking at Russia, we saw a relatively rapid transition (20 years) from the upper right corner of the 1980s to the present lower left corner. The Chinese Cultural Revolution succeeded in moving from the lower right corner to the upper right corner. The transition from top to bottom is more abrupt than usual, and there are many examples in Arab Spring. During the past century, the United States has made steady progress from the lower left to the upper middle, at the expense of growth for stability. I think this is the missing dimension; wealth creates a desire to move up and more stable. Poverty moves to the right and leads to the need to move toward higher growth. These are not direct conflicts - but it is easiest to pursue stability at the expense of growth and the easiest to pursue growth is to reduce or eliminate the structure of compulsory stability I will sacrifice. The end of the history of Fukuyama is democratic liberal capitalism, which combines political stability and market turmoil and enables stable growth.