4 ms·

The overt "real life" war with China has been coming for a long time. They have never had a plan to stop it. Leading edge technology (including but not limited

by ilaksh 3y ago

The overt "real life" war with China has been coming for a long time. They have never had a plan to stop it. Leading edge technology (including but not limited to AI) is currently being used for cyber and psychological warfare and planning. Many people may try to blame some technology for the war. But the real cause is the failure of those with power to find alternatives to warfare for political and social integration and overall to effectively manage resources. Beyond that, there are significant contingents (not limited to any particular country) that has a Malthusian, selfish, racist, explicitly non-civil worldview, in which human lives aren't fundamentally valued. So for this group, warfare is in some ways desirable.

genman 3y ago
I think you have correctly identified that following the Malthusian model is the death spiral that will lead to the war eventually - even when US and (especially) China do not follow this model. We can see already today how there are countries that are living past the Malthusian growth and are relaying in large part on the imported food, but still keep expanding their population exponentially.
lucubratory 3y ago
Yes, as someone reasonably familiar with Chinese politics, history, and military modernisation (for a westerner, anyway), watching our societies sleepwalk into war under the mistaken impressions that 1) the war will be short or 2) we are likely to win, is disturbing. I am genuinely worried about the likely results of the American public psyche when thousands of American soldiers are dead within the first week and there's no feasible military option to break a PLA blockade on Taiwan. I think for a lot of Americans who are used to American military supremacy in the GWOT, including a lot of Americans who weren't even alive for Soviet conventional overmatch, the idea that the USA could lose (not be 'unable to win and give up', but actually physically unable to prevent their enemy from achieving their objectives or seizing and holding territory) is literally unfathomable to them, like the sun rising in the west tomorrow. I am genuinely worried that the US population would overwhelmingly support a nuclear response, even though I trust the American government to not be that stupid.
- scrubs 3y ago
  There's some truth in what you write. China, unlike say the middle east, constitutes larger risk for the US. Their preoccupation with taiwan is more focused and narrow then the diffuse albeit incremental territory expansion by the grunt warfare of Russia. Nonetheless we must ask if only America would back Taiwan in war. I have tried to suss out Taiwanese preference. While it ebbs and flows I don't think they want the Chinese there. Like the Ukrainians, theirs is a fight of soul not of ideological conquest. China hasn't had their nose bloodied recently; the US has. Thats something. Who'd else would be in? And would it matter? I'm also not sure the Chinese are prepared for the isolation that'd result. Would it really be worth it? The Taiwanese would leave the island or be a permanent "domestic terrorist" force if China wins. But to rejoin the article, AI is but a tool for a goal they already made their mind up about.
- r14c 3y ago
  It depends a lot on what demographics you're talking about. Unfortunately, the loudest and most politically empowered very likely fall in line with what you're saying. There have been massive anti-war demonstrations in the wake of every US military action in the last 50-70 years, but their voices are not exactly welcomed by the establishment.
  - lucubratory 3y ago
    Absolutely, to be clear I'm not at all saying that all Americans are bloodthirsty or anything like that, I have several American friends. I'm more worried about something like a post-9/11 moment, where there's a relatively unified populace and a clear target for hatred, but because said target can't be meaningfully hurt the US just starts lashing out at anyone vaguely associated. I'm worried it will be worse because in this case it wouldn't be "We can't hurt them because we don't know where they are" but "We can't hurt them because they're locally stronger than us and they have nuclear weapons". I'm not sure how many Americans will genuinely, truly understand that you can't treat a nuclear power as though it's Iraq or Japan and you're going to Desert Storm or Hiroshima your way through their military and population, not if you want America as a civilisation to survive.
- 3y ago

by ilaksh 3y ago

genman 3y ago

I think you have correctly identified that following the Malthusian model is the death spiral that will lead to the war eventually - even when US and (especially) China do not follow this model. We can see already today how there are countries that are living past the Malthusian growth and are relaying in large part on the imported food, but still keep expanding their population exponentially.

lucubratory 3y ago

Yes, as someone reasonably familiar with Chinese politics, history, and military modernisation (for a westerner, anyway), watching our societies sleepwalk into war under the mistaken impressions that 1) the war will be short or 2) we are likely to win, is disturbing. I am genuinely worried about the likely results of the American public psyche when thousands of American soldiers are dead within the first week and there's no feasible military option to break a PLA blockade on Taiwan. I think for a lot of Americans who are used to American military supremacy in the GWOT, including a lot of Americans who weren't even alive for Soviet conventional overmatch, the idea that the USA could lose (not be 'unable to win and give up', but actually physically unable to prevent their enemy from achieving their objectives or seizing and holding territory) is literally unfathomable to them, like the sun rising in the west tomorrow. I am genuinely worried that the US population would overwhelmingly support a nuclear response, even though I trust the American government to not be that stupid.

scrubs 3y ago
There's some truth in what you write. China, unlike say the middle east, constitutes larger risk for the US. Their preoccupation with taiwan is more focused and narrow then the diffuse albeit incremental territory expansion by the grunt warfare of Russia. Nonetheless we must ask if only America would back Taiwan in war. I have tried to suss out Taiwanese preference. While it ebbs and flows I don't think they want the Chinese there. Like the Ukrainians, theirs is a fight of soul not of ideological conquest. China hasn't had their nose bloodied recently; the US has. Thats something. Who'd else would be in? And would it matter? I'm also not sure the Chinese are prepared for the isolation that'd result. Would it really be worth it? The Taiwanese would leave the island or be a permanent "domestic terrorist" force if China wins. But to rejoin the article, AI is but a tool for a goal they already made their mind up about.
r14c 3y ago
It depends a lot on what demographics you're talking about. Unfortunately, the loudest and most politically empowered very likely fall in line with what you're saying. There have been massive anti-war demonstrations in the wake of every US military action in the last 50-70 years, but their voices are not exactly welcomed by the establishment.
- lucubratory 3y ago
  Absolutely, to be clear I'm not at all saying that all Americans are bloodthirsty or anything like that, I have several American friends. I'm more worried about something like a post-9/11 moment, where there's a relatively unified populace and a clear target for hatred, but because said target can't be meaningfully hurt the US just starts lashing out at anyone vaguely associated. I'm worried it will be worse because in this case it wouldn't be "We can't hurt them because we don't know where they are" but "We can't hurt them because they're locally stronger than us and they have nuclear weapons". I'm not sure how many Americans will genuinely, truly understand that you can't treat a nuclear power as though it's Iraq or Japan and you're going to Desert Storm or Hiroshima your way through their military and population, not if you want America as a civilisation to survive.
3y ago