5 ms·

China’s economy is slowing down long-term. This means that there is likely no longer sufficient constant increase in standards of living to keep the populace ha

China’s economy is slowing down long-term. This means that there is likely no longer sufficient constant increase in standards of living to keep the populace happy with the Party. A natural alternative for authoritarian regimes to keep their people in check is to nurture strong nationalism. This nationalism eventually tends to eat its own creators by pushing the leaders to declare war.

cagenut 4y ago
yea but they still manage to get re-elected and stay rich and show their paintings on morning shows
enkid 4y ago
I mean, that's a theory I have heard, and subscribed too, but what's an actual example of this occurring in history? Nationalism and aggression was baked into Nazi Germany and Italy from the get go. Japan went to war in China in the 1930s not because of a ruling clique that wanted to maintain power, but because of the rogue actions of military officers. The subsequent declaration of war was about losing in China vs. internal political pressure. The USSR's invasions of it's neighbors in the 20s through the 40s ( and then periodically in the Cold War) went unpunished until it collapsed. It's invasion of Afghanistan might fit, but that wasn't driven by Nationalism, but rather by a Marxist view of history. Saddam's invasion of Kuwait didn't lead to his downfall, that was more his incident lie that he had WMDs. Portugal and Spain had Nationalist governments well into the 70s that seemed pretty stable. The only example I can really think of is maybe Serbia during the break up of Yugoslavia? But that hardly feels like a generalizable example.
- option 4y ago
  current russia is a great example of this
  - enkid 4y ago
    Putin had no need to invade Ukraine to maintain his power.
- LarryMullins 4y ago
  > Japan went to war in China in the 1930s not because of a ruling clique that wanted to maintain power, but because of the rogue actions of military officers. This is myopic. Yes, the Manchurian Incident was kicked off the invasion of Manchuria and then the Second Sino-Japanese War was a rogue act by a few officers. But that was just the spark that started a bonfire; who piled all the wood up? Who was responsible for the decades of military buildup that preceded it? Were the acquisition of all those battleships and carriers a series of rogue acts as well? Before WW2, the Japanese government spent decades trying to maneuver Japan into being an imperialist world power that could rival America or the UK. The 'ruling clique' of Japan didn't strike the first spark, but they did labor to engineer the circumstance in which such a spark would inevitably find ample fuel to burn.
  - Fatnino 4y ago
    After World War 1, Japan grabbed parts of Siberia, Manchuria and hundreds of formerly German held islands. There was a huge earthquake and subsequent fire that destroyed Tokyo on September 1st, 1923. Here I quote a 1928 atlas from its article about Japan, after it mentions the then recent earthquake: "The old saying which everyone is familiar with: "It's an ill wind which blows no one good," seems to be the case so far as the Japanese disaster is concerned. The United States seems to have been selected by a divine providence as the beneficiary of the Almighty in reducing Japan through the recent disaster to a state where she may, be considered as impotent to take up arms against the United States for at least ten years, it is estimated. It had been reported by military experts of the United States the Japan, prior to the earthquake, was preparing for a break with the United States and it was thought that they would strike during the years 1924 to 1927. With the rebuilding program ahead of Japan, thrift and saving, among both the government and people, alone will make it possible for Japan to revive." The tone probably doesn't sit comfortably in modern ears, but remember this was written by an American over 90 years ago.
  - enkid 4y ago
    No, your missing my point. I'm not saying nationalism didn't cause the war, I'm saying it seems more externally driven than internally. Japan going to war was about becoming a major power and putting it in a position where it couldn't be colonized by external powers vice maintaining power by creating a common adversary. The incident in Manchuria surely wouldn't have been possible without those circumstances, but it also wasn't engineered to strengthen the Japanese ruling elite.
dirtyid 4y ago
The entire PRC economy slowing down hence need to rely nationalism from west is more projection than reality. Even pessemsitic estimates of 3-5% growth is plenty to maintain visible QoL upgrades YoY. PRC isn't going to be west for the foreseeable future where decline in standards is much more pronounced. More PRC citizens in T3/4+ cities (where majority are) will be buying their first cars or whatever fancy domestic gadgets are and feel their life is getting better. There's still huge visible improvements happening. Or that perhaps the directionality of "eating own creators" prediction is wrong, sometimes war is strategically desirable, and if so, it's prudent to prepare population by cultivating nationalism. Which really there hasn't been much despite western reporting, it's more natural generational awakening among younger cohorts who grew up in richer regions of PRC that west isn't all that, especially when they are now trying to contain PRC prospects. By my estimate, right now state of PRC nationalism is more like 6/10 vs most Anglo countries are 8/10s. Fervent nationalism voices are still largely repressed from PRC mainstream narrative while the other "indicator" of PRC nationalism in western rags are some cosmopolitan kids starting to renfaire hanfu costumes and preferring domestic brands. It's nothing. Just like these exercises in response to new US TW policy act.
bigcat12345678 4y ago
> This means that there is likely no longer sufficient constant increase in standards of living to keep the populace happy with the Party. Yep Not like some country where switching a figure head every 4 years can keep the peons happy
solarkraft 4y ago
When that war comes things usually turn terrible and collapse. Why do leaders keep thinking it will be different this time?

cagenut 4y ago

yea but they still manage to get re-elected and stay rich and show their paintings on morning shows

enkid 4y ago

I mean, that's a theory I have heard, and subscribed too, but what's an actual example of this occurring in history? Nationalism and aggression was baked into Nazi Germany and Italy from the get go. Japan went to war in China in the 1930s not because of a ruling clique that wanted to maintain power, but because of the rogue actions of military officers. The subsequent declaration of war was about losing in China vs. internal political pressure. The USSR's invasions of it's neighbors in the 20s through the 40s ( and then periodically in the Cold War) went unpunished until it collapsed. It's invasion of Afghanistan might fit, but that wasn't driven by Nationalism, but rather by a Marxist view of history. Saddam's invasion of Kuwait didn't lead to his downfall, that was more his incident lie that he had WMDs. Portugal and Spain had Nationalist governments well into the 70s that seemed pretty stable. The only example I can really think of is maybe Serbia during the break up of Yugoslavia? But that hardly feels like a generalizable example.

option 4y ago
current russia is a great example of this
- enkid 4y ago
  Putin had no need to invade Ukraine to maintain his power.
LarryMullins 4y ago
> Japan went to war in China in the 1930s not because of a ruling clique that wanted to maintain power, but because of the rogue actions of military officers. This is myopic. Yes, the Manchurian Incident was kicked off the invasion of Manchuria and then the Second Sino-Japanese War was a rogue act by a few officers. But that was just the spark that started a bonfire; who piled all the wood up? Who was responsible for the decades of military buildup that preceded it? Were the acquisition of all those battleships and carriers a series of rogue acts as well? Before WW2, the Japanese government spent decades trying to maneuver Japan into being an imperialist world power that could rival America or the UK. The 'ruling clique' of Japan didn't strike the first spark, but they did labor to engineer the circumstance in which such a spark would inevitably find ample fuel to burn.
- Fatnino 4y ago
  After World War 1, Japan grabbed parts of Siberia, Manchuria and hundreds of formerly German held islands. There was a huge earthquake and subsequent fire that destroyed Tokyo on September 1st, 1923. Here I quote a 1928 atlas from its article about Japan, after it mentions the then recent earthquake: "The old saying which everyone is familiar with: "It's an ill wind which blows no one good," seems to be the case so far as the Japanese disaster is concerned. The United States seems to have been selected by a divine providence as the beneficiary of the Almighty in reducing Japan through the recent disaster to a state where she may, be considered as impotent to take up arms against the United States for at least ten years, it is estimated. It had been reported by military experts of the United States the Japan, prior to the earthquake, was preparing for a break with the United States and it was thought that they would strike during the years 1924 to 1927. With the rebuilding program ahead of Japan, thrift and saving, among both the government and people, alone will make it possible for Japan to revive." The tone probably doesn't sit comfortably in modern ears, but remember this was written by an American over 90 years ago.
- enkid 4y ago
  No, your missing my point. I'm not saying nationalism didn't cause the war, I'm saying it seems more externally driven than internally. Japan going to war was about becoming a major power and putting it in a position where it couldn't be colonized by external powers vice maintaining power by creating a common adversary. The incident in Manchuria surely wouldn't have been possible without those circumstances, but it also wasn't engineered to strengthen the Japanese ruling elite.

dirtyid 4y ago

The entire PRC economy slowing down hence need to rely nationalism from west is more projection than reality. Even pessemsitic estimates of 3-5% growth is plenty to maintain visible QoL upgrades YoY. PRC isn't going to be west for the foreseeable future where decline in standards is much more pronounced. More PRC citizens in T3/4+ cities (where majority are) will be buying their first cars or whatever fancy domestic gadgets are and feel their life is getting better. There's still huge visible improvements happening. Or that perhaps the directionality of "eating own creators" prediction is wrong, sometimes war is strategically desirable, and if so, it's prudent to prepare population by cultivating nationalism. Which really there hasn't been much despite western reporting, it's more natural generational awakening among younger cohorts who grew up in richer regions of PRC that west isn't all that, especially when they are now trying to contain PRC prospects. By my estimate, right now state of PRC nationalism is more like 6/10 vs most Anglo countries are 8/10s. Fervent nationalism voices are still largely repressed from PRC mainstream narrative while the other "indicator" of PRC nationalism in western rags are some cosmopolitan kids starting to renfaire hanfu costumes and preferring domestic brands. It's nothing. Just like these exercises in response to new US TW policy act.

bigcat12345678 4y ago

> This means that there is likely no longer sufficient constant increase in standards of living to keep the populace happy with the Party. Yep Not like some country where switching a figure head every 4 years can keep the peons happy

solarkraft 4y ago

When that war comes things usually turn terrible and collapse. Why do leaders keep thinking it will be different this time?