3 ms·

I totally agree with you that geopolitics matter, no matter how much one wishes we could just live in a world that isn't "might makes right". But I'd still arg

by vtange 10y ago

I totally agree with you that geopolitics matter, no matter how much one wishes we could just live in a world that isn't "might makes right". But I'd still argue that using terms like "Russia's backyard" or "China's backyard" dangerously colors entire regions their color without regard for whether the countries in the region want to be associated with their nearby superpower. Germany once had nearly all of Europe and Japan once had nearly all of Asia. Couldn't one say at the time the U.K. was in Germany's backyard and China in Japan's?

anigbrowl 10y ago
You're not wrong, but the increasingly imperialist tone of public discourse is a reflection of reality as well as a driver of it. My basic read of the world situation is that financialization and globalization have brought a tremendous increase in economic capability but also created massive internal political stresses within many countries - not least the USA - through the abruptness of the disruption. Historically, countries often deal with internal strife by going to war with someone else, and it's probably been this way since the first cell dealt with an uncomfortable pH balance by squirting caustic goo at a neighboring cell. Almost nobody wants a full-on nuclear exchange but I think some sort of world war is inevitable because peaceful competition has created a lot of losers as well as winners, in both psychic and economic terms. Once about 10% of a population is sufficiently pissed off, strife is inevitable and the only question that remains is how it will manifest..
- fjdlwlv 10y ago
  Wars aren't to placate the populace. Wars are started by elites grabbing for wealth and power, who propagandize thr populace to their cause.
  - anigbrowl 10y ago
    It's hard to propagandize people who are content since they have little incentive to alter their disposition. Of course the populace is propagandized, but you're talking as if they're incapable of having a preference over their own economic situation, which is absurd. People feel sad and angry when their life gets worse, and propagandists can channel such emotions. Angry people are naturally easier to motivate than happy ones, because they want something to change whereas happy people don't. (Obviously I'm phrasing things a bit loosely for the sake of brevity here.)

by vtange 10y ago

anigbrowl 10y ago

You're not wrong, but the increasingly imperialist tone of public discourse is a reflection of reality as well as a driver of it. My basic read of the world situation is that financialization and globalization have brought a tremendous increase in economic capability but also created massive internal political stresses within many countries - not least the USA - through the abruptness of the disruption. Historically, countries often deal with internal strife by going to war with someone else, and it's probably been this way since the first cell dealt with an uncomfortable pH balance by squirting caustic goo at a neighboring cell. Almost nobody wants a full-on nuclear exchange but I think some sort of world war is inevitable because peaceful competition has created a lot of losers as well as winners, in both psychic and economic terms. Once about 10% of a population is sufficiently pissed off, strife is inevitable and the only question that remains is how it will manifest..

fjdlwlv 10y ago
Wars aren't to placate the populace. Wars are started by elites grabbing for wealth and power, who propagandize thr populace to their cause.
- anigbrowl 10y ago
  It's hard to propagandize people who are content since they have little incentive to alter their disposition. Of course the populace is propagandized, but you're talking as if they're incapable of having a preference over their own economic situation, which is absurd. People feel sad and angry when their life gets worse, and propagandists can channel such emotions. Angry people are naturally easier to motivate than happy ones, because they want something to change whereas happy people don't. (Obviously I'm phrasing things a bit loosely for the sake of brevity here.)