5 ms·

What’s the point of producing chips when you can’t sell them? China invading Taiwan would mean embargoes, which in turn would crash Chinese economy. Invading

by trasz 4y ago

What’s the point of producing chips when you can’t sell them? China invading Taiwan would mean embargoes, which in turn would crash Chinese economy. Invading Taiwan just doesn’t make any sense.

radu_floricica 4y ago
Neither did invading Ukraine, and yet here we are. And China already trashed the treaties guaranteeing a certain level of autonomy in Hong Kong.
Yizahi 4y ago
Of course it doesn't make any sense. Cooperation is always more beneficial to both sides than isolationism. But Emperor Xi has decided to rule forever, so in a case of severe internal economic crisis he may decide to wage a Small Victorious War (tm), just like every dictator did since the beginning of times. Also I read that they have a doctrine which says that Taiwan need to be occupied, but I may be wrong about exact details here. And embargo is not a given thing, just see ruzzia today. Critical exports are allowed because they are simultaneously critical imports for others. I think any Chinese military action would show immediately just how impotent "world organisations" really are. I bet there would be close to no real consequences for China after annexation of Taiwan.
- trasz 4y ago
  “Emperor Xi” needs to win elections to keep ruling, and destroying country’s economy isn’t particularly good way of achieving that. Embargo is a given; US is just waiting for opportunity. Sure, it wouldn’t be a total embargo, but it would be crippling anyway. Look at how China dropped their strategic cooperation with Russia, including areas that aren’t explicitly sanctioned. I don’t think Russia can survive their current war, and that serves as a nice example to others. Russia is very different from China. Comparing a superpower to “Nigeria with nukes” is a bit pointless, but one of the crucial differences is that Russians know they can’t expect anything good from their mafia state. Chinese - quite the opposite, they expect sustained rapid growth, like the past five decades. Another difference is that Chinese don’t seem very enthusiastic about wars, compared to Russians - or Americans. And no, they don’t have occupation of Taiwan in their doctrine. China has been repeatedly explaining they seek peaceful unification. And they seem fine playing the long game, ready to wait a couple of generations for it to happen.
  - Yizahi 4y ago
    Xi would "win" "elections" this year, this would be a simple confirmation of his desire and not a problem for him. After that he will rule permanently, because no dictator can rescind power without facing a reaction from the successor. Taiwan occupation can happen at any time in the future, so elections, real or staged, won't interfere with it. Yes, invasion would cause recession, but it won't be framed like that in the media. The recession (maybe) would start before the invasion, then invasion will happen to cover it up and blame outside force (USA of course) for the economic hardships, and this actually works every time. And of course occupation would be peaceful. At least for the first 5 minutes. It would be a totally peaceful blockade on sea and air with a totally reasonable and peaceful demand to surrender all control of the island, disarm army and so on. And when treacherous evil Taiwanese will dare to treacherously attack the blockade forces, then China will be forced to a totally justified self defense. Just like ruzzia today is "defending" from imaginary Nato. They really believe that btw. You underestimate ability of authoritarian state to twist words and invent doublespeak.
    - trasz 4y ago
      That’s a nice description of your prejudices, but you failed to show any facts that would support it. For starters - why do you assume the elections, which essentially work the same way as presidential elections in US, would be staged? Again, China is not Russia. Mentality-wise, USA is closer to Russia than China is.
      - Yizahi 4y ago
        They may be not "staged" but pointless instead. I once real some long text about their high party politics, and the gist of it was that previously they had a tradition that every decade or so current chairman selects his successor. And that successor brings up his own team, mostly renewing high government posts. It seems that Xi is breaking that tradition and decided to continue ruling forever. Thus he will freeze any political successions in the country. And to do that he would be forced to tighten regulation and control over everything, which will mean even more emphasis on the loyal subordinates and so vicious autocratic circle will continue. Also USA presidential elections are joke, and definitely not a good benchmark to look at. Whole world somehow understands that simple vote by every single citizen is the best way to elect a leader, if you prefer democratic process in general. Also USA is definitely not even close to the ruzzia. I wouldn't evaluate China here, but ruzzia and USA are pretty much on the opposite spectrum in mentality, until Orange-man at least.
- radu_floricica 4y ago
  China had several changes of power since Mao. It's probably fair to say it's at risk of becoming a dictatorship, but you can't take it as a given without at least adding some arguments.
  - Yizahi 4y ago
    Yes, I read that they had an interesting and it seems effective tradition of appointing successors who bring new teams into high ranking posts. The issue is that Xi is on the verge of breaking that tradition as far as I understand. And stagnation and gentrification of country government always ends badly. Sometimes very badly. We will get a change to observe China's course in real time so to say.
    - trasz 4y ago
      Not “appointing”, but voting. Just like in US. Unless you want to maintain that eg displacing Gang of Four was Mao’s idea. But yes, if Xi held power despite losing support that would be… fairly bad.
      - AnimalMuppet 4y ago
        > Not “appointing”, but voting. Just like in US. No, not like in the US. When someone is allowed to run who is not a member of the CCP (and who is running against the CCP), then that's getting close. When the chairman loses an election and has to leave office, replaced by someone who is not from the CCP, then that's elections like the US.
        trasz 4y ago
        Your response suggests you either don’t have a clue about US and their presidential requirements (from official, like being born in US, to de facto, like belonging to one of two approved parties), or about China, in particular what what CPC is and how the “party” here is essentially a mistranslation.
Tostino 4y ago
To have a domestic supply for the largest market on the planet?

by trasz 4y ago

What’s the point of producing chips when you can’t sell them? China invading Taiwan would mean embargoes, which in turn would crash Chinese economy. Invading Taiwan just doesn’t make any sense.

radu_floricica 4y ago

Neither did invading Ukraine, and yet here we are. And China already trashed the treaties guaranteeing a certain level of autonomy in Hong Kong.

Yizahi 4y ago

Of course it doesn't make any sense. Cooperation is always more beneficial to both sides than isolationism. But Emperor Xi has decided to rule forever, so in a case of severe internal economic crisis he may decide to wage a Small Victorious War (tm), just like every dictator did since the beginning of times. Also I read that they have a doctrine which says that Taiwan need to be occupied, but I may be wrong about exact details here. And embargo is not a given thing, just see ruzzia today. Critical exports are allowed because they are simultaneously critical imports for others. I think any Chinese military action would show immediately just how impotent "world organisations" really are. I bet there would be close to no real consequences for China after annexation of Taiwan.

trasz 4y ago
“Emperor Xi” needs to win elections to keep ruling, and destroying country’s economy isn’t particularly good way of achieving that. Embargo is a given; US is just waiting for opportunity. Sure, it wouldn’t be a total embargo, but it would be crippling anyway. Look at how China dropped their strategic cooperation with Russia, including areas that aren’t explicitly sanctioned. I don’t think Russia can survive their current war, and that serves as a nice example to others. Russia is very different from China. Comparing a superpower to “Nigeria with nukes” is a bit pointless, but one of the crucial differences is that Russians know they can’t expect anything good from their mafia state. Chinese - quite the opposite, they expect sustained rapid growth, like the past five decades. Another difference is that Chinese don’t seem very enthusiastic about wars, compared to Russians - or Americans. And no, they don’t have occupation of Taiwan in their doctrine. China has been repeatedly explaining they seek peaceful unification. And they seem fine playing the long game, ready to wait a couple of generations for it to happen.
- Yizahi 4y ago
  Xi would "win" "elections" this year, this would be a simple confirmation of his desire and not a problem for him. After that he will rule permanently, because no dictator can rescind power without facing a reaction from the successor. Taiwan occupation can happen at any time in the future, so elections, real or staged, won't interfere with it. Yes, invasion would cause recession, but it won't be framed like that in the media. The recession (maybe) would start before the invasion, then invasion will happen to cover it up and blame outside force (USA of course) for the economic hardships, and this actually works every time. And of course occupation would be peaceful. At least for the first 5 minutes. It would be a totally peaceful blockade on sea and air with a totally reasonable and peaceful demand to surrender all control of the island, disarm army and so on. And when treacherous evil Taiwanese will dare to treacherously attack the blockade forces, then China will be forced to a totally justified self defense. Just like ruzzia today is "defending" from imaginary Nato. They really believe that btw. You underestimate ability of authoritarian state to twist words and invent doublespeak.
  - trasz 4y ago
    That’s a nice description of your prejudices, but you failed to show any facts that would support it. For starters - why do you assume the elections, which essentially work the same way as presidential elections in US, would be staged? Again, China is not Russia. Mentality-wise, USA is closer to Russia than China is.
    - Yizahi 4y ago
      They may be not "staged" but pointless instead. I once real some long text about their high party politics, and the gist of it was that previously they had a tradition that every decade or so current chairman selects his successor. And that successor brings up his own team, mostly renewing high government posts. It seems that Xi is breaking that tradition and decided to continue ruling forever. Thus he will freeze any political successions in the country. And to do that he would be forced to tighten regulation and control over everything, which will mean even more emphasis on the loyal subordinates and so vicious autocratic circle will continue. Also USA presidential elections are joke, and definitely not a good benchmark to look at. Whole world somehow understands that simple vote by every single citizen is the best way to elect a leader, if you prefer democratic process in general. Also USA is definitely not even close to the ruzzia. I wouldn't evaluate China here, but ruzzia and USA are pretty much on the opposite spectrum in mentality, until Orange-man at least.
radu_floricica 4y ago
China had several changes of power since Mao. It's probably fair to say it's at risk of becoming a dictatorship, but you can't take it as a given without at least adding some arguments.
- Yizahi 4y ago
  Yes, I read that they had an interesting and it seems effective tradition of appointing successors who bring new teams into high ranking posts. The issue is that Xi is on the verge of breaking that tradition as far as I understand. And stagnation and gentrification of country government always ends badly. Sometimes very badly. We will get a change to observe China's course in real time so to say.
  - trasz 4y ago
    Not “appointing”, but voting. Just like in US. Unless you want to maintain that eg displacing Gang of Four was Mao’s idea. But yes, if Xi held power despite losing support that would be… fairly bad.
    - AnimalMuppet 4y ago
      > Not “appointing”, but voting. Just like in US. No, not like in the US. When someone is allowed to run who is not a member of the CCP (and who is running against the CCP), then that's getting close. When the chairman loses an election and has to leave office, replaced by someone who is not from the CCP, then that's elections like the US.
      - trasz 4y ago
        Your response suggests you either don’t have a clue about US and their presidential requirements (from official, like being born in US, to de facto, like belonging to one of two approved parties), or about China, in particular what what CPC is and how the “party” here is essentially a mistranslation.

Tostino 4y ago

To have a domestic supply for the largest market on the planet?