4 ms·
>The world order we know was built by and for the US when it was the uncontested superpower. You mean after the fall of the Soviet Union? Because Soviet Union
by DeathArrow 6mo ago
>The world order we know was built by and for the US when it was the uncontested superpower.
You mean after the fall of the Soviet Union? Because Soviet Union used to contest US power.
>Countries that spent decades being the West's cheap labor pool have risen up, industrialized, built real militaries, and they are not going back to where they were. But the West isnt going to voluntarily get poorer to make room for them either.
So you believe relations between countries are a 0 sum game?
- poszlem 6mo agoThe soviet union did not contest that order so much as exist outside of it. When it collapsed, those institutions didn't change they just lost their counterweight. aggregate economic growth is positive sum, but the things that actually matter in geopolitics, namely who controls chokepoints, who sets standards, whose currency denominates trade, who has military primacy in a given region are zero-sum or close to it. china getting richer grows the pie. china getting rich enough to contest US naval dominance in the South China Sea does not. both are happening simultaneously. pointing at the first doesn't make the second disappear.