|
Post by Least censored on the planet! on Mar 13, 2023 3:32:20 GMT -5
Every forum should have a resident foaming black piller/vegan/communist/trans rights activist/Nazi/Catholic/whatever. Hey, I'm vegan, almost! I'm vegetarian but I try to avoid dairy.
|
|
|
Post by easye on Mar 13, 2023 9:44:55 GMT -5
That Germany 1906 seems apt to me, as they were both "rising" powers trying to find their place in the existing world order, and as a result focused on breaking it. That world order was established post-WWII and was heavily pro-American.
It always confuses me seeing Americans trying to break it, ala Trump removing us from NATO; because why are we trying to break the system we designed to benefit us? Makes 0 sense to me.
|
|
|
Post by mrmystic on Mar 13, 2023 10:33:19 GMT -5
I find it a bit terrifying as an analogy to be honest, because it was German insistence on trying to break the mold and force everyone local to them into obeisance that effectively caused WW1. I'd rather China didn't pull the same strategy.
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Mar 13, 2023 10:52:18 GMT -5
China tried and failed to break the US world order mold in the short term. Hu tried to build up China's soft power approach for a decade, just to have it thoroughly deconstructed by Xi. A place in the sun in Africa or South America sounds great, but the time it would take for that to have a serious effect might be decades away, with the demographic turn having already started as the population saw its first decline in decades.
Germany was a land based power with a developed economy and a growing population.
China is a land based power surrounded by impossible or not very useful targets on land, with an economy that still needs to tick over to developed and a declining population. Too reliant on foreign trade for now and having ruined a lot of its soft power approach that will hamper further efforts.
The US offered a new world order with much of the world and the major powers in ruin. China will not have that luck.
|
|
|
Post by mrmystic on Mar 13, 2023 10:54:45 GMT -5
You misunderstand. I'm not scared that they'll succeed. I'm scared that they'll be idiotic enough to try, and in doing so trigger off something bigger over Taiwan or Japan or the like.
China won't survive the apocalypse, but neither will we in the UK. And make no mistake, we'd be dragged in the moment shots are exchanged with the US.
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Mar 13, 2023 10:56:50 GMT -5
It always confuses me seeing Americans trying to break it, ala Trump removing us from NATO; because why are we trying to break the system we designed to benefit us? Makes 0 sense to me. I think it might be a bit of isolationism and the idea that the US bootstrapped itself to where it is now, because it is incredibly hard to distinguish the benefits of the US versus the US global system for those who were born into it.
|
|
|
Post by easye on Mar 13, 2023 10:58:05 GMT -5
China tried and failed to break the US world order mold in the short term. Hu tried to build up China's soft power approach for a decade, just to have it thoroughly deconstructed by Xi. A place in the sun in Africa or South America sounds great, but the time it would take for that to have a serious effect might be decades away, with the demographic turn having already started as the population saw its first decline in decades. Germany was a land based power with a developed economy and a growing population. China is a land based power surrounded by impossible or not very useful targets on land, with an economy that still needs to tick over to developed and a declining population. Too reliant on foreign trade for now and having ruined a lot of its soft power approach that will hamper further efforts. The US offered a new world order with much of the world and the major powers in ruin. China will not have that luck. Thanks, I had not realized that Xi had dismantled much of the Belt and Roads system that Hu set-up. I had heard that they were pivoting to more of a Central Asia strategy called something stupid like the New Silk Road. Appreciate the information.
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Mar 13, 2023 10:59:06 GMT -5
You misunderstand. I'm not scared that they'll succeed. I'm scared that they'll be idiotic enough to try, and in doing so trigger off something bigger over Taiwan or Japan or the like. China won't survive the apocalypse, but neither will we in the UK. And make no mistake, we'd be dragged in the moment shots are exchanged with the US. But this is making a lot of assumptions, because you need a lot of people crazy enough to support Xi in destroying the world over Taiwan. It's a bit like Putin, Ukraine and nuclear weapons. Would all the cronies be willing to throw their lives away for the hubris of one man?
|
|
|
Post by easye on Mar 13, 2023 11:06:34 GMT -5
That Iran-Saudi diplomatic breakthrough led by China should probably get a shout-out here: Archrivals Iran and Saudi Arabia agree to end years of hostilities in deal mediated by Chinawww.cnn.com/2023/03/13/middleeast/saudi-iran-regional-impact-mime-intl/index.htmlFurther evidence that the House of Saud is falling out of the US orbit, and frankly I do not care. However, it is an example of China trying to step-up and show that it can be a leader on the world stage in Diplomacy. Probably a needed win after that ridiculous stunt with Russia and Ukraine.
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Mar 13, 2023 11:10:52 GMT -5
China tried and failed to break the US world order mold in the short term. Hu tried to build up China's soft power approach for a decade, just to have it thoroughly deconstructed by Xi. A place in the sun in Africa or South America sounds great, but the time it would take for that to have a serious effect might be decades away, with the demographic turn having already started as the population saw its first decline in decades. Germany was a land based power with a developed economy and a growing population. China is a land based power surrounded by impossible or not very useful targets on land, with an economy that still needs to tick over to developed and a declining population. Too reliant on foreign trade for now and having ruined a lot of its soft power approach that will hamper further efforts. The US offered a new world order with much of the world and the major powers in ruin. China will not have that luck. Thanks, I had not realized that Xi had dismantled much of the Belt and Roads system that Hu set-up. I had heard that they were pivoting to more of a Central Asia strategy called something stupid like the New Silk Road. Appreciate the information. Xi did not so much dismantle it, as reduce it to a mostly economic transaction. Xi's increasingly authoritarian rule, his increased nationalism in the South China Sea and his treatment of the Uyghurs has destroyed most of the goodwill in the region. Hu certainly wasn't perfect in his soft-hard power balance, but little is left under Xi except being able to throw around money. This has led to mostly desperate countries like Afghanistan or Pakistan (who fear the rise of India) to still be willing to throw their lot in with China. But countries like India, the Philippines, Vietnam, Taiwan and Japan now clearly see the risk posed by China and are bringing the US in as a counterweight and/or strengthening themselves.
|
|
|
Post by mrmystic on Mar 13, 2023 11:51:03 GMT -5
You misunderstand. I'm not scared that they'll succeed. I'm scared that they'll be idiotic enough to try, and in doing so trigger off something bigger over Taiwan or Japan or the like. China won't survive the apocalypse, but neither will we in the UK. And make no mistake, we'd be dragged in the moment shots are exchanged with the US. But this is making a lot of assumptions, because you need a lot of people crazy enough to support Xi in destroying the world over Taiwan. It's a bit like Putin, Ukraine and nuclear weapons. Would all the cronies be willing to throw their lives away for the hubris of one man? It ultimately doesn't even have to be about Xi. Kaiser Wilhelm was off on holiday when WW1 started, and his advisors miscommunicated what was going on to him to get his approval for their actions. Once the environment is created for these sorts of things to occur, they may occur whether actively intended by the leader, or by his advisors, or by the people, or by many external factors; whether they want it or not. Hence my mild nervousness about watching similar conditions being generated.
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Mar 13, 2023 11:58:15 GMT -5
But this is making a lot of assumptions, because you need a lot of people crazy enough to support Xi in destroying the world over Taiwan. It's a bit like Putin, Ukraine and nuclear weapons. Would all the cronies be willing to throw their lives away for the hubris of one man? It ultimately doesn't even have to be about Xi. Kaiser Wilhelm was off on holiday when WW1 started, and his advisors miscommunicated what was going on to him to get his approval for their actions. Once the environment is created for these sorts of things to occur, they may occur whether actively intended by the leader, or by his advisors, or by the people, or by many external factors; whether they want it or not. Hence my mild nervousness about watching similar conditions being generated. We can't compare a potential war with China with WW1, simply due to the vast differences in technology, doctrine and the far weaker Wilhelm mostly being a passenger to events instead of an actual leader. Sure, if Xi manages to push for war or a series of escalations ends up resulting in war, it will end up very bloody. That is still a far cry from an end of the world scenario, because a war can be relatively contained as no direct borders are involved. War is still to be avoided of course.
|
|
|
Post by maddocgrotsnik on Mar 13, 2023 15:49:56 GMT -5
You misunderstand. I'm not scared that they'll succeed. I'm scared that they'll be idiotic enough to try, and in doing so trigger off something bigger over Taiwan or Japan or the like. China won't survive the apocalypse, but neither will we in the UK. And make no mistake, we'd be dragged in the moment shots are exchanged with the US. Yeah, but at least a Tory PM will fire off our nukes, so we don’t miss out on the genocide and general war crimes before our horrific fiery demise.
|
|
|
Post by pacific on Mar 14, 2023 10:20:13 GMT -5
What make sit hard to judge China's rise to power is that you can't really take anything it claims at face value. It is hard to objectively verify how powerful they really are. But objective power is hard to grasp anyway. The US is the strongest country in the world when it comes to economic (through say sanctions) or military power. Yet the US isn't infrequently on the losing/not achieving what it wants side when trying to wield either as a weapon. Whose was the quote? "The US is a hammer, everyone else is a nail"? I think that is probably still the case, especially since the humbling of Russia in Ukraine, but I suppose it depends if you are just viewing this in military terms. China might not do it's own 'Vietnam' or 'Afghanistan' and take part in a military venture halfway around the world, but from what I have read the economic reach and investment is achieving power in other ways. The UK's few nuclear plant developments wouldn't be happening without Chinese money, especially now others (the Japanese) have withdrawn. Australia has a real chimerical relationship with them, on the one hand socially and politically they are on completely separate pages, and opposed in many ways, but China is paying them so much money (I had read something like a billion dollars a day for the minerals being mined and shipped out) that they give a middle finger with one hand and an open palm with the other. Then you have the 'belt and road' investment going on in Africa and the middle east (south america too?), there is a lot of power and influence involved in these things. Even if it isn't demonstrated as a carrier battle group positioned off of a coast.
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Mar 14, 2023 11:09:33 GMT -5
Sure, but it doesn't yet come close to the standing of the Dollar and the US in the international system.
It gives a lot of (purchasing) power to China now, but still not as much as the US (and one could say China's economic power is decreasing due to distrust). The question is if it can ever grow enough to become a viable/large enough alternative with multiple looming economic problems.
Simply handing out money isn't going to directly translate in power. The question is what you really get in return besides resources. The vast majority of Chinese investments still go to Western countries and they aren't making any real friends over here.
|
|