11 ms·

Am I the only one who is worried every time such a news drops? Achieving high-tech autarky is a first step towards a war with china becoming viable. Not that th

Am I the only one who is worried every time such a news drops? Achieving high-tech autarky is a first step towards a war with china becoming viable. Not that the alternative would be much better: a war being nonviable and the west bending to their wishes. But still, I think it shows there are real concerns on the highest levels and it is considered an actual possibility. Scary.

cies 6y ago
I like this guy's take on things: https://youtu.be/mX4owHcVjFo https://youtu.be/mX4owHcVjFo
- dbuder 6y ago
  A self declared communist defending the CCP on moral grounds? What do you like?
  - cies 6y ago
    > A self declared communist Source? Because he's not by his actions even close to a communist. And having been in China lately, I can ensure you CCP is only communist in name.
antupis 6y ago
So called https://mediawiki.middlebury.edu/IPE/Golden_Arches_Theory_of_Conflict_Prevention https://mediawiki.middlebury.edu/IPE/Golden_Arches_Theory_of...
- IG_Semmelweiss 6y ago
  I believe this was disproven with the war of 1995. https://www.quora.com/What-you-think-about-Golden-Arches-theory-of-Conflict-resolution https://www.quora.com/What-you-think-about-Golden-Arches-the...
- sgeisler 6y ago
  Thx for the pointer, nice to know the name of the theory. Although it only covers a part of my argument. My concern was also in regards to how much military tech could be built on short notice inside the US if it came to a prolonged war and most of the existing toys were destroyed after some months. That was what I meant with a war being nonviable (would end in a nuclear MAD scenario imo without the capacity to rebuild conventional weapons).
mschuster91 6y ago
> Achieving high-tech autarky is a first step towards a war with china becoming viable. Definitely, but it's also a sensible precaution against natural disaster (earthquakes, tsunamis), madman-going-mad (especially Kim Jong Un, whose missiles have more than enough capability to reach Taiwan) and other (like the Suez Canal fuck-up) risk. It simply is too much risk when too many companies depend on one single other company's (TSMC) products... Apple, AMD/ATI, almost all automobile supply chains...
- oaiey 6y ago
  And not forget, there are other dependencies (cheap stuff vs exports to the US) beyond just semiconductors.
AniseAbyss 6y ago
ASML builds the machines that Intel, TSMC and every other fab relies on. You never hear much about them. They are based in the Netherlands- a country that prefers to operate below the radar.
- phlipski 6y ago
  And below sea level! I'll be here all week folks!
randomopining 6y ago
CCP is going to start the war. That's the problem with autocratic ethnostates.
- typon 6y ago
  Given the history of the number of wars started by the United States vs. started by China in the past 80 years, this comment seems highly ahistorical.
  - spaetzleesser 6y ago
    The US has a long history of taking on small countries. They usually don’t start something against a strong opponent.
  - Dirlewanger 6y ago
    US's foreign policy of 50 years ago is not the same as it is today. Since the USSR's fall, the US has been highly reactionary. There's no overarching "containment" policy that required to be proactive. Meanwhile, the CCP has a searing hatred for an island 100 miles off its coast because of events no one alive remembers.
  - scottLobster 6y ago
    Chinese incursions into Taiwanese airspace have increased in the past few months. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/26/taiwan-reports-incursion-by-20-chinese-military-aircraft https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/26/taiwan-reports... It's speculation, but China appears to be building up normalcy bias in Taiwanese defenses, get them used to seeing Chinese aircraft and making them more complacent. Add the fact that China's national victim mentality is driving it to restore itself to it's perceived state before the "west" messed it up (includes regaining Taiwan), and that objective being one of the socio-political foundations of the CCP's power, and the CCP being well aware that China will start running out of young people in next decade due to one child policy (makes military adventures harder for both manpower and economic reasons), and Xi consolidating more power under himself and his cult of personality than any Chinese ruler since Mao... Yeah if I was Taiwan I'd be subtly building some extra "tourism infrastructure" on the beaches and quietly stepping up training requirements for reserves; and give the US whatever it wants in exchange for a couple of carrier battle groups if needed.
redis_mlc 6y ago
I get that you're a peacenik, but your comment is very silly. China has been at war with the US since the 1950s.
rualca 6y ago
> Achieving high-tech autarky is a first step towards a war with china becoming viable. That's a false dillema. The choice is not between self-sufficiency and war with China, and dependency and ever-lasting peace with China. The choice is actually between war with China when China controls all the industry, and war with China when it fails to control and restrict access to that resource. Given the choice, achieving self-sufficiency is more likely to ensure peace/dissuade war than dependency.
- tovej 5y ago
  I see, it looks to me like you've replaced one false dilemma with another false dilemma. Why would a war with China be inevitable?
CivBase 6y ago
The US's current dependency on China is one-way. China is not co-dependent on the US. The existing dependency structure does not incentivize China to avoid war. Besides, most of the US wars in the last half century have been started because the US was dependent on another nation. It seems a self-sufficient US may actually be less likely to go to war.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
onepointsixC 6y ago
I'm confused as to your assertion that war somehow wouldn't be viable. WW1 was previously thought to be impossible because of the economic interdependence and trade and yet all the same it had happened. We're talking about a a revisionist, expansionist state that is rising, believes the existing power to be fragile, weak, and on the decline. It isn't a question of "Viability". The CCP sees serious geopolitical benefits to an armed conflict.
duxup 6y ago
People aren't logical, there's no magical economic connection, or even military deterrent that you can rely on to prevent a war.

cies 6y ago

I like this guy's take on things: https://youtu.be/mX4owHcVjFo https://youtu.be/mX4owHcVjFo

dbuder 6y ago
A self declared communist defending the CCP on moral grounds? What do you like?
- cies 6y ago
  > A self declared communist Source? Because he's not by his actions even close to a communist. And having been in China lately, I can ensure you CCP is only communist in name.

antupis 6y ago

So called https://mediawiki.middlebury.edu/IPE/Golden_Arches_Theory_of_Conflict_Prevention https://mediawiki.middlebury.edu/IPE/Golden_Arches_Theory_of...

IG_Semmelweiss 6y ago
I believe this was disproven with the war of 1995. https://www.quora.com/What-you-think-about-Golden-Arches-theory-of-Conflict-resolution https://www.quora.com/What-you-think-about-Golden-Arches-the...
sgeisler 6y ago
Thx for the pointer, nice to know the name of the theory. Although it only covers a part of my argument. My concern was also in regards to how much military tech could be built on short notice inside the US if it came to a prolonged war and most of the existing toys were destroyed after some months. That was what I meant with a war being nonviable (would end in a nuclear MAD scenario imo without the capacity to rebuild conventional weapons).

mschuster91 6y ago

> Achieving high-tech autarky is a first step towards a war with china becoming viable. Definitely, but it's also a sensible precaution against natural disaster (earthquakes, tsunamis), madman-going-mad (especially Kim Jong Un, whose missiles have more than enough capability to reach Taiwan) and other (like the Suez Canal fuck-up) risk. It simply is too much risk when too many companies depend on one single other company's (TSMC) products... Apple, AMD/ATI, almost all automobile supply chains...

oaiey 6y ago
And not forget, there are other dependencies (cheap stuff vs exports to the US) beyond just semiconductors.

AniseAbyss 6y ago

ASML builds the machines that Intel, TSMC and every other fab relies on. You never hear much about them. They are based in the Netherlands- a country that prefers to operate below the radar.

phlipski 6y ago
And below sea level! I'll be here all week folks!

randomopining 6y ago

CCP is going to start the war. That's the problem with autocratic ethnostates.

typon 6y ago
Given the history of the number of wars started by the United States vs. started by China in the past 80 years, this comment seems highly ahistorical.
- spaetzleesser 6y ago
  The US has a long history of taking on small countries. They usually don’t start something against a strong opponent.
- Dirlewanger 6y ago
  US's foreign policy of 50 years ago is not the same as it is today. Since the USSR's fall, the US has been highly reactionary. There's no overarching "containment" policy that required to be proactive. Meanwhile, the CCP has a searing hatred for an island 100 miles off its coast because of events no one alive remembers.
- scottLobster 6y ago
  Chinese incursions into Taiwanese airspace have increased in the past few months. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/26/taiwan-reports-incursion-by-20-chinese-military-aircraft https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/26/taiwan-reports... It's speculation, but China appears to be building up normalcy bias in Taiwanese defenses, get them used to seeing Chinese aircraft and making them more complacent. Add the fact that China's national victim mentality is driving it to restore itself to it's perceived state before the "west" messed it up (includes regaining Taiwan), and that objective being one of the socio-political foundations of the CCP's power, and the CCP being well aware that China will start running out of young people in next decade due to one child policy (makes military adventures harder for both manpower and economic reasons), and Xi consolidating more power under himself and his cult of personality than any Chinese ruler since Mao... Yeah if I was Taiwan I'd be subtly building some extra "tourism infrastructure" on the beaches and quietly stepping up training requirements for reserves; and give the US whatever it wants in exchange for a couple of carrier battle groups if needed.

redis_mlc 6y ago

I get that you're a peacenik, but your comment is very silly. China has been at war with the US since the 1950s.

rualca 6y ago

> Achieving high-tech autarky is a first step towards a war with china becoming viable. That's a false dillema. The choice is not between self-sufficiency and war with China, and dependency and ever-lasting peace with China. The choice is actually between war with China when China controls all the industry, and war with China when it fails to control and restrict access to that resource. Given the choice, achieving self-sufficiency is more likely to ensure peace/dissuade war than dependency.

tovej 5y ago
I see, it looks to me like you've replaced one false dilemma with another false dilemma. Why would a war with China be inevitable?

CivBase 6y ago

The US's current dependency on China is one-way. China is not co-dependent on the US. The existing dependency structure does not incentivize China to avoid war. Besides, most of the US wars in the last half century have been started because the US was dependent on another nation. It seems a self-sufficient US may actually be less likely to go to war.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

onepointsixC 6y ago

I'm confused as to your assertion that war somehow wouldn't be viable. WW1 was previously thought to be impossible because of the economic interdependence and trade and yet all the same it had happened. We're talking about a a revisionist, expansionist state that is rising, believes the existing power to be fragile, weak, and on the decline. It isn't a question of "Viability". The CCP sees serious geopolitical benefits to an armed conflict.

duxup 6y ago

People aren't logical, there's no magical economic connection, or even military deterrent that you can rely on to prevent a war.