达里奥：我现在已经非常非常仔细地研究了过去500年的历史——你会发现，在过去500年里，有16次，一个正在崛起的大国来挑战一个现存的大国。就像你说的，德国在欧洲，日本在亚洲。这是野兽的本性。这意味着肯定存在竞争。因此，一场贸易战—一股制造问题的实力相当的力量。
DALIO: I’ve made a point now to study history of the last 500 years very, very carefully — what you see is that in the last 500 years there have been 16 times where a power comes to challenge an existing power, a rising power. So like you say in Germany, within Europe or Japan within Asia, that was the nature of that beast. That means that there’s certainly rivalry. So a trade war — a comparable power that creates an issue.
达里奥：我不是说我们要打一场枪战。但我要说的是，历史表明，战争结束后会有一个和平时期，因为有一个主导力量。二战后，美国不仅在经济上强大，而且垄断了核能。
因此，由于这种权力，联合国在纽约，世界银行和国际货币基金组织在华盛顿。历史上看，崛起的力量挑战现存的力量，就产生了冲突。我们正在步入一个新时代，
DALIO: I’m not saying we’re going to get into a shooting war. But I am saying that — the history that has shown that when you have wars, after a war you have a dominant power and you have periods of peace — because you have a dominant power. After World War II the United States was powerful, both economically and also it had a monopoly on nuclear power.
And so as a result of that power, you know, the United Nations is in New York, the World Bank and the IMF are in Washington, D.C. because it determined that. And in history, then when you have the rising power, to challenge the existing power, you have elements of conflict. I’m saying, I don’t want to overdo this, but I am saying that we are entering an era in which anybody who reads history and policy-makers around the world recognize this — that this issue with China rising means that there are naturally going to be conflicts and how do you resolve conflicts in a world market?
去全球化和自给自足
主持人：肯尼迪在书中提到，每一个大国都是通过超越国界的扩张而成为世界强国的。您如何看待当前在美国、英国和其他地方似乎正在发生的去全球化?
达里奥：我想你是在说两件事。在某些情况下，全球化并非如此。比如中国的是一带一路。我们在世界各地都看到来自中国的投资。这是全球化的一种方式。你将看到更多的人民币贷款。你会看到世界上有更多的中国的银行。
全球化的意思，
我认为全球化已经达到顶峰。我们现在处在一个更加去全球化的环境中。因为担心这个能感知到威胁和冲突的环境，我认为会产生一种去全球化的力量。
同样，资本流动中也发生了同样的情况。如果中国投资者更担心发生冲突，那么来自美国的投资就能受到更多限制，他们也不太愿意在美国投资。
所以我认为——我认为我们正朝着去全球化和几乎独立的自给自足的方向发展。
DALIO: Well I think you’re talking about there are two different things. In those cases it wasn’t so much the globalization. There was the globalization of those countries. Just like the globalization of China. We’re now seeing the one belt, one road; we’re seeing investments all around the world. That’s carrying that forward.
With that you will see more lending in renminbi. You will see more Chinese banks in the world and so on so forth and that will expand very, very analogist (ph).
Regarding globalization, which is the idea of producing at one place and selling at some place else in the most efficient way is that there’s not much trade barriers so that they can do or the globalization of capital markets, the free flow of money into and out of countries and all of that.
I think that that’s peaked and that we’re now in an environment in which we’ll go to a more of deglobalization kind of environment, and because of this somewhat threatening environment the perceived worry that you could have a conflict, I think that creates a force that reinforces the deglobalization, because let’s say if you’re going to produce something — if you’re producing things in China that we need in the United States by way of example, there might be a concern about doing that.
