What is the real crisis of the global order? Writing in Foreign Affairs magazine, Alexander Cooley and Daniel H. Nexon argue that the problem is illiberalism is on the rise. The contest of the century is not simply the United States vs China, but liberal democracy vs autocracy. Recently, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken warned that China aims to dominate the world. On the other side of the geopolitical divide, the Russians say it is Nato that is expanding eastward, while Beijing accuses Washington of having a Cold War mentality in trying to contain China and stir up trouble over Xinjiang , Tibet, Hong Kong and Taiwan. The American foreign policy community has always lamented that, despite opening up economically, the Chinese did not convert politically to the liberal democratic model. Thus, the next step is to contain these “revisionist” powers. This “convert or contain” approach smacks of fundamentalist Christian beliefs that non-believers are either to be evangelised or defeated. Modern capitalism has deep religious roots. German sociologist Max Weber pronounced that the spirit of capitalism came from the Protestant ethic. Even though capitalism existed in ancient China, India and other cultures, its modern ethos is based on Protestant Christianity that revolted against the authority of the Roman Catholic Church. The Puritan streak in American capitalism favours hard work and acquisition of assets for the glory of God. Capitalist greed therefore has religious roots. To be rich is glorious. Never mind that the wealth might have come from exploitation of other human beings and mother nature. International relations theorist Alexander Wendt argues that modern social science (including international relations) is founded on the key assumptions of materialism (reality is physical); reductionism (larger things can be reduced to smaller things); determinism (things behave in law-like ways); mechanism (there is cause and effect); and objectivism (there exists objective truth). These assumptions are embedded in American foreign policy, rational liberal democracy, human rights and the rules-based order. At the same time, religious faith is made material by placing the motto “In God We Trust” on coins and banknotes. In contrast, two foundational texts of Chinese political thought are I-Ching (Book of Changes) and Tao-te Ching (Book of the Way and of Virtue). Unlike the Bible, the most translated book in the world, which begins: “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth”, Tao-te Ching begins: “The Tao that can be expressed is not the eternal Tao.” In other words, the Tao flies in the face of the assumptions of modern social science. In this world view, no rule that can be articulated is absolute, and no belief can be taken for granted. How the I Ching informs China’s harmonious pursuit of geopolitical strategy For Christians, God is perfect and man’s job is to seek perfection. According to the Tao, change is the only constant. Human beings are not individual actors but part of the natural order, and thus have obligations to the world and nature. Duality is a major concept in Taoism. The natural world is full of opposites and yet they, like yin and yang, can be combined. China’s current dual circulation policy can easily be understood as Taoist. One example of the contradiction between liberal democracy and autocracy is the issue of legitimacy, with democracies often failing to reflect on their own record. The latest Edelman Trust Barometer, based on samples taken across 27 countries, shows that in China, the public has the highest average trust in NGOs, business, government and media – a total of 83 per cent. This contrasts with the United Kingdom (44 per cent), and the US (43 per cent). In particular, the US trust index has declined 10 percentage points since 2017. How China is seeking promote its world view and roll back Westernisation The crisis in the global order is not one of ideology, but of fundamental world views as to whether the world is unipolar and monocultural, or polycentric and where diverse systems and beliefs can coexist and co-create with each other. In my view, the problem with the liberal democratic order is not whether autocracy is on the rise, but whether the liberal order is fit for purpose in a world threatened with existential climate change . After more than 40 years of the liberal order, the world is seeing high social inequality, accelerating climate change , rising seas, and failing governance in many places. Environmentalists say we have less than three decades to get to net zero carbon emissions. Society needs to change. Yet, democratic governments facing elections that cost more and more to win find it harder and harder to take tough structural adjustments that are necessary to achieve both carbon neutrality and social equality. As Cooley and Nexon themselves admit, “In their current form, liberal institutions cannot stem the rising illiberal tide … Any attempt to grapple with this crisis will require policy decisions that are clearly illiberal or necessitate a new version of liberal order.” To put it simply, the righteous politicians of the rules-based order thus have their hands tied by their own rules. This is a bind that leaders with a Taoist world view, and with a more realistic sense of things that need to happen for harmony to ensue, are less likely to find themselves in. For liberal democrats, the idealistic search for the best has led to electoral promises remaining promises, and no delivery of better jobs and a fairer society for all. Whither the global order? For Christians, let us pray. Taoists will know to expect more changes to come. Andrew Sheng writes on global issues from an Asian perspective