5 ms·

An alternative explanation might involve both of: 1. Stopping technology transfer worked exceedingly well for the west weakening the Soviet Union during the Co

by xgk 3y ago

An alternative explanation might involve both of: 1. Stopping technology transfer worked exceedingly well for the west weakening the Soviet Union during the Cold War. 2. A distinct lack of (non-violent) alternatives for the West preventing China becoming the world's leading technological superpower (and hence also strongest military). I doubt this will be successful in the long run, because China is not burdened by the Soviet Union's extremely inefficient way of organising its economy. Not to mention that China is the worlds biggest market.

chaostheory 3y ago
It will work in the long run due to China’s terrible demographics, which are worse than Japan’s; and Xi’s extreme mishandling of China’s economy and foreign relations which are both intertwined. All that’s needed is a military containment of China.
- pphysch 3y ago
  Washington can't even military contain the Houthis, or Iranians, or Russians.
  - chaostheory 3y ago
    1. Russia should have overwhelmed Ukraine years ago. Yet It’s still stuck. The EU is also finally mobilizing militarily. Also, this really isn’t our problem anymore. The EU can’t even give us good trade deals. They’re too busy passing one protectionist law after another. What’s the point when until now they were unwilling to pay their fair share into defense? 2. Iran isn’t doing anything but proxy wars here and there. Mostly in places where we will eventually retreat from. 3. Washington doesn’t need to contain any of them. Globalism is no longer a US interest. We are tired of subsidizing world trade and world security for little to no gain. All we get plenty of is criticism. Only countries that need energy imports from the Middle East are worried about the Houthis. Unlike many other countries, the US does not need energy imports or food imports. This is everyone else’s problem now.
    - pphysch 3y ago
      1. This is factually incorrect and ahistorical. Russia obviously had no intention of "overwhelming" a massive country with half a million NATO-trained soldiers in 2022 with only 200K Russian soldiers. Even if the AFU wasn't a massive military, 200K soldiers is not enough to occupy that entire country. 2. I guess this is a way to dodge the Houthis question, who are actively striking US-aligned ships. What happened to "Operation Prosperity Guardian"? 3. And yet Washington does want to contain China? This sounds like "I can't lose because I'm not even trying".
- xgk 3y ago
  > China’s terrible demographics Are China's demographics appreciatively different from other industrialised countries? Questionable. Not to mention that it's unclear why an aging society is a problem at least for the next 100 years or so (e.g. most violent crime is perpetrated by the under-30s). It's also easy, at least for a dictatorship, to increase the birth rate (e.g. restrict access to all birth control, give massive preferences to families with children, like housing, salary, "bachelor tax" etc). > military containment of China. That is expensive. One frequently cited explanation for the collapse of the Soviet Union was that its poor economy could not support its oversized army, which it needed to keep the Soviet Bloc at heel (not to mention all the revolutions and secession movements it fostered elsewhere). Also, does anyone actually believe that China is expansionist? Compare: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States#21st-century_wars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_Uni... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_Peo... The strategic problem of China's rise is more that other countries will eventually switch allegiance away from the West.
  - coupdejarnac 3y ago
    Nice propaganda. Meanwhile China is building islands in the South China sea and provoking violent encounters with fishermen and coast guards, causing nearly everybody in SEA to build stronger military ties with the USA. The only ones to switch allegiance to China will be the ones who have been bought off.
    - FooBarWidget 3y ago
      Meanwhile, Vietnam upgrades ties with China, Singapore performed joint military training with China, the Malaysian minister blasts the west for having a too one-sided and hysterical view of China, and both Indonesia and Philippines report that Vietnam is actually the worst offender in the South China Sea issues (indeed, Vietnam already built islands 30 years before China). And when AUKUS was founded, were Malaysia and Indonesia happy that the west came to their aid to fight the evil CCP? No, they were alarmed. Just whose side is being propagandized?
- cjbgkagh 3y ago
  > All that’s needed is a military containment of China. I know the 'demographics is destiny' is the Washington Consensus but it should be understood that these are the same people wrecking our economy over and over again and starting forever wars we end up losing.
cjbgkagh 3y ago
I think the same, this is disadvantageous long run, but I'm not in power and the people in power appear to be complete morons with little understanding of history or nuance. I'm pretty sure we're rapidly heading into a West vs China military conflict. I think part of the reason we've held rates higher for longer is that it hurts China more than the West as a way to undermine the Chinese economy. Coupled with the sanctions the West is getting ready for a 'timing attack'. But if the West is wrong and loses that war then we're effed. I would prefer a graceful stepping down from world hegemon and taking our seat at a multipolar world where we can focus on getting our own house in order. But obviously those in charge have other incentives.
- 082349872349872 3y ago
  Don't say that sort of thing too loudly; JFK quoted a chengyu (骑虎难下) in support of a similar notion, in 1961 (and for his pains got cancelled in 1963): https://www.jfklibrary.org/archives/other-resources/john-f-kennedy-speeches/inaugural-address-19610120 https://www.jfklibrary.org/archives/other-resources/john-f-k...

by xgk 3y ago

chaostheory 3y ago

It will work in the long run due to China’s terrible demographics, which are worse than Japan’s; and Xi’s extreme mishandling of China’s economy and foreign relations which are both intertwined. All that’s needed is a military containment of China.

pphysch 3y ago
Washington can't even military contain the Houthis, or Iranians, or Russians.
- chaostheory 3y ago
  1. Russia should have overwhelmed Ukraine years ago. Yet It’s still stuck. The EU is also finally mobilizing militarily. Also, this really isn’t our problem anymore. The EU can’t even give us good trade deals. They’re too busy passing one protectionist law after another. What’s the point when until now they were unwilling to pay their fair share into defense? 2. Iran isn’t doing anything but proxy wars here and there. Mostly in places where we will eventually retreat from. 3. Washington doesn’t need to contain any of them. Globalism is no longer a US interest. We are tired of subsidizing world trade and world security for little to no gain. All we get plenty of is criticism. Only countries that need energy imports from the Middle East are worried about the Houthis. Unlike many other countries, the US does not need energy imports or food imports. This is everyone else’s problem now.
  - pphysch 3y ago
    1. This is factually incorrect and ahistorical. Russia obviously had no intention of "overwhelming" a massive country with half a million NATO-trained soldiers in 2022 with only 200K Russian soldiers. Even if the AFU wasn't a massive military, 200K soldiers is not enough to occupy that entire country. 2. I guess this is a way to dodge the Houthis question, who are actively striking US-aligned ships. What happened to "Operation Prosperity Guardian"? 3. And yet Washington does want to contain China? This sounds like "I can't lose because I'm not even trying".
xgk 3y ago
> China’s terrible demographics Are China's demographics appreciatively different from other industrialised countries? Questionable. Not to mention that it's unclear why an aging society is a problem at least for the next 100 years or so (e.g. most violent crime is perpetrated by the under-30s). It's also easy, at least for a dictatorship, to increase the birth rate (e.g. restrict access to all birth control, give massive preferences to families with children, like housing, salary, "bachelor tax" etc). > military containment of China. That is expensive. One frequently cited explanation for the collapse of the Soviet Union was that its poor economy could not support its oversized army, which it needed to keep the Soviet Bloc at heel (not to mention all the revolutions and secession movements it fostered elsewhere). Also, does anyone actually believe that China is expansionist? Compare: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States#21st-century_wars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_Uni... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_Peo... The strategic problem of China's rise is more that other countries will eventually switch allegiance away from the West.
- coupdejarnac 3y ago
  Nice propaganda. Meanwhile China is building islands in the South China sea and provoking violent encounters with fishermen and coast guards, causing nearly everybody in SEA to build stronger military ties with the USA. The only ones to switch allegiance to China will be the ones who have been bought off.
  - FooBarWidget 3y ago
    Meanwhile, Vietnam upgrades ties with China, Singapore performed joint military training with China, the Malaysian minister blasts the west for having a too one-sided and hysterical view of China, and both Indonesia and Philippines report that Vietnam is actually the worst offender in the South China Sea issues (indeed, Vietnam already built islands 30 years before China). And when AUKUS was founded, were Malaysia and Indonesia happy that the west came to their aid to fight the evil CCP? No, they were alarmed. Just whose side is being propagandized?
cjbgkagh 3y ago
> All that’s needed is a military containment of China. I know the 'demographics is destiny' is the Washington Consensus but it should be understood that these are the same people wrecking our economy over and over again and starting forever wars we end up losing.

cjbgkagh 3y ago

I think the same, this is disadvantageous long run, but I'm not in power and the people in power appear to be complete morons with little understanding of history or nuance. I'm pretty sure we're rapidly heading into a West vs China military conflict. I think part of the reason we've held rates higher for longer is that it hurts China more than the West as a way to undermine the Chinese economy. Coupled with the sanctions the West is getting ready for a 'timing attack'. But if the West is wrong and loses that war then we're effed. I would prefer a graceful stepping down from world hegemon and taking our seat at a multipolar world where we can focus on getting our own house in order. But obviously those in charge have other incentives.

082349872349872 3y ago
Don't say that sort of thing too loudly; JFK quoted a chengyu (骑虎难下) in support of a similar notion, in 1961 (and for his pains got cancelled in 1963): https://www.jfklibrary.org/archives/other-resources/john-f-kennedy-speeches/inaugural-address-19610120 https://www.jfklibrary.org/archives/other-resources/john-f-k...