[Jeremiah Squatpump]

You think it's fascist for a country to choose not to trade with an actual FASCIST country that has an aggressively antagonist foreign policy against them? 1. That's ridiculous, and 2. you and everyone else need to get your priorities straight.

"Capitalism doesn't work like that". Spoken like a true neoliberal. China has protected all of its economy and all of its companies from foreign investment not in their interests. Does capitalism work like that? Why in the name of Pete should we not be doing the same? Why are we only acting in the interests of the big western/US corporations? I'm sure most people can figure out the answer.

China has made it clear they don't want a peaceful trade relationship with the West, we've been trying that for 20 years & it's not working. So you want to know how to control China? You bring their economy to its knees and make them our bitch. If China wants to make it "us vs them" then I choose us. We're like a dog rolling on its back with another dog laying on top of them. I can assure you they're counting on your continued complacency. Nice guys finish last. Your move, Western civilization.

Good luck with believing China will become the bitch of declining liberal democracies.

The low gig economy is a product of Capitalism. Or I should say Thatcherism. The EU internal market was Britain's savour in their 70s/80s revival. And when we shipped our industry East and Germany didn't, that is where our real problems began - which has been laid down for all to see today. Today we now rely on finance and sevices for our GDP. Not so good during an pandemic I see.

And China will only deal with us if we have something to offer. And we don't. Or we do, but they can get it else where. They however can offer us a lot. We are not in a good position here. And the only way out of it is to bring a new industrial revolution back home.

We didn’t ship our industries anywhere, they collapsed because we could no longer compete.
You can’t re-create a second industrial revolution once you’ve become a consumer society. For that to happen you’d need an economic collapse, or war.

We all know there’s something wrong with the western version of capitalism. So we look around for someone to blame, someone who is doing better than we are. We then blame them and try to bring down their economy to prove that what doesn’t work does. We shout about the freedom to live in low paid gig-economies, ignore mass-poverty, cheer on the political elite and then complain we’re run by the political elite. We don't learn and that's why we're in decline.

[B0ycey]

We didn’t ship our industries anywhere, they collapsed because we could no longer compete.
You can’t re-create a second industrial revolution once you’ve become a consumer society. For that to happen you’d need an economic collapse, or war.

Many did. Some shipped out.

Although an industrial revolution only needs a national effort. A focus on the things you lack and an investment in them.

[JohnRawls]

Good luck with believing China will become the bitch of declining liberal democracies.



We didn’t ship our industries anywhere, they collapsed because we could no longer compete.
You can’t re-create a second industrial revolution once you’ve become a consumer society. For that to happen you’d need an economic collapse, or war.

We all know there’s something wrong with the western version of capitalism. So we look around for someone to blame, someone who is doing better than we are. We then blame them and try to bring down their economy to prove that what doesn’t work does. We shout about the freedom to live in low paid gig-economies, ignore mass-poverty, cheer on the political elite and then complain we’re run by the political elite. We don't learn and that's why we're in decline.

Liberal democracies have been "declining" for the last 100 years yet they are still here. There is a reason for that. The current situation that we find ourselves in is not even that unique. It is pretty similar to the 1890s, 1900s and pre-war 1910s. Just the outsourcing place is India and China instead of the Russian empire.

[noemon]

Good luck with believing China will become the bitch of declining liberal democracies.

That has been her default place ever since liberal democracy became a thing. Good luck on believing that this will change.

We didn’t ship our industries anywhere, they collapsed because we could no longer compete.
You can’t re-create a second industrial revolution once you’ve become a consumer society. For that to happen you’d need an economic collapse, or war.

That is preposterous, the suggestion that western countries require "economic collapse or war" to set up factories and manufacturing facilities is absolutely ridiculous. Your lack of faith is disturbing. Western countries have significant advantages in technology, software and manufacturing processes, all the crucial moving parts of large western manufacturing facilities in China are run by westerners in western software. They no longer require Chinese slave labour to be competitive in the world market, they never did, it was merely a move to maximise profits for profit sake. Today that profit is evaporating because Chinese labour becomes more expensive, trade wars, large transportation costs, etcetera. Today the largest percent of a products value goes to marketing not for its production and right now the greatest marketing trick is to build local and sustainable, this trend has already brought things back from the dead in several cities, things like tailors and tanners, things like bakers and more are to follow as Covid-19 wipes out the fat and makes rents and economics more affordable for locals. Western consumers do not care about paying £1 for a primark t-shirt as much as they did 10 years ago, they can pay 2.50 for a crappy british made t-shirt and still be happy. Bubble economies is the future. And in the mean-time all can easily be offset by relocating to Eastern and Southern Europe as well as Latin America and around China but not in China. China was made because the west outsourced its manufacturing there for Chinese slave labour, her greatest achievement the past 50 years has been to offer hundreds of millions of slaves to western corporations, her 5 year plans are all built around maintaining that slave labour so that she can be the bitch of preference for Apple Inc. Trends change and by the time she realises it will already be too late for her because at the end of the day she has no liberal social culture that can effectively pick up on the trends of the free-world.

[Unthinking Majority]

That is preposterous, the suggestion that western countries require "economic collapse or war" to set up factories and manufacturing facilities is absolutely ridiculous.

I don't propose returning manufacturing to the West, it would raise costs to our goods and we couldn't complete globally. I propose spreading western manufacturing much more to many different countries so 1. no single country can leverage the West with that economic power over us, and 2. no single country will vastly rise in power like China has, or India could etc.

[noemon]

I don't propose returning manufacturing to the West, it would raise costs to our goods and we couldn't complete globally. I propose spreading western manufacturing much more to many different countries so 1. no single country can leverage the West with that economic power over us, and 2. no single country will vastly rise in power like China has, or India could etc.

Yeap I agree with that, though in all honesty I think people overestimate the rise of cost for a finished product and the reason for that is because we have all been brainwashed by years of propaganda that aimed to excuse the manufacturing flight to Asia. Switzerland & Sweden still maintain a rather enormous manufacturing base with the highest salaries in the planet($25 per hour minimum wage for Switzerland).

Eastern & Southern Europe, the M-E, Latin America, Africa & the rust-belt in the US, huge areas available with an educated and cheap workforce more than capable to build anything made in China better, quicker, more efficiently and possibly with a cheaper final price-tag as well. It is not normal that this suggestion sounds as crazy as it does and that is due to persistent knee-jerk vilification of labour costs when labour costs are the smallest component of an items cost breakdown while marketing costs often surpass the cost of its component parts. When this is put into perspective a different picture emerges. Slightly increased labour costs can be offset with reduced shipping costs and the remaining difference can be made up by minimally reducing marketing costs. And by minimally it truly is tiny to the point of an accounting rounding due to the size of the marketing pie when compared to the labour pie.

[Fasces]

Why does the world hate the West, the West wonders, as the West advocates for keeping the world in a state of sub-development in such a way that they can be kept permanently subordinate. It is absolutely, after all, natural and right that one billion humans rule the other six.

[noemon]

West advocates for keeping the world in a state of sub-development

Yah man cause outsourcing western production from China to Africa, Eastern Europe and Latin America would be keeping the world in a state of sub-development.

Why should China build everything the world consumes? Does she have a divine right because she offers the most readily available slave labour? How is this over-centralisation and monopoly of production good for the world in general?

Also the world does not hate the west, 99% of the hate comes from the west's own cynics.

[Fasces]

I am talking about comments like @Unthinking Majority that specifically mention that countries like India or China, both of which have larger populations than the West in its entirety, should never be in a position to threaten the West economically. How you can hold a position like that with a straight face, and at the same time wonder why there is no trust for the Western developmental model in regions like Southeast Asia, Africa or South America is beyond me.

The West is entering a period of corrupt complacency and decline - like the Ming before them. They'll be left behind for a century or two of humiliation, and hopefully come back better. The establishment of an independent economic structure that doesn't have the West as a lynchpin will be viewed, and rightly so, as an existential crisis for the Western oligarchy and political elite - but I'm not so dumb as to confuse their prosperity with my own, and ideally this will serve as the catalyst for a better, more equitable and egalitarian Western society for my descendants when the now dominant powers in the rest of the world inevitably have their own crisis of stagnation and corruption.

[Unthinking Majority]

Why does the world hate the West, the West wonders, as the West advocates for keeping the world in a state of sub-development in such a way that they can be kept permanently subordinate. It is absolutely, after all, natural and right that one billion humans rule the other six.

I understand why you think this. But you're blaming the West when you should be blaming the anarchic international system of competing states.

The West said to China "hey let's do business together and both make a ton of money" and then China said "Ok but we're also going to steal tons of your tech IP and break whatever international or domestic trade laws we can in order to start out-competing you so we can dominate the global economy and use our rising clout to bully your citizens and businesses and buy off your politicians, buy up your businesses, natural resources, and real estate, and then start trying to dominate Hong Kong and genocide our Muslim minorities". Doesn't sound much different than what the US does, does it? The USSR and the US did pretty similar things around the world and to each other during the Cold War didn't they?

The reality is if any African or Asian or Latin American country had the power the US and the West had they'd do exactly the same terrible things to us as we've done to them the last 500 years, if not worse. Same goes for indigenous people. The Aztecs and Incas had brutal conquering empires just before Columbus arrived.

I'm not in any way a violent or greedy person nor do I want anyone in this world to suffer needlessly or live in poverty, but if there's people out there who would kill me & my family and steal my things if they had the chance then I have to protect myself and make sure that doesn't happen. If it's us vs them then I choose us. Brokering peace with a totalitarian fascist regime bent on global domination is a fools errand. I'd rather be Churchill than Chamberlain.

[Fasces]

The reality is if any African or Asian or Latin American country had the power the US and the West had they'd do exactly the same terrible things to us as we've done to them the last 500 years, if not worse.

This is the base assumption of Western exceptionalism and morality that I take umbrage with. I don't believe an international system headed by former victims would be nearly as oppressive. The fundamental problem in the global community today is that every nation has been forcibly humbled by historical events and the legacy of colonialism except those in the West. This fundamentally affects their world-view - or rather, the world view of the political and economic elites in these countries. China has demonstrated a capacity for egalitarian and co-equal development over the last two decades that the West has not: you can argue that this is a ploy to buy votes, or to gain confidence, and that they intend to become evil snakes at some point in the future, but at this point you're justifying Western crimes on theoretical future Chinese or Indian crimes - and I'm unconvinced entirely by the rhetoric of "We're shit, but don't worry, they'd be shit too given half a chance."

[Unthinking Majority]

The West is entering a period of corrupt complacency and decline - like the Ming before them. They'll be left behind for a century or two of humiliation, and hopefully come back better. The establishment of an independent economic structure that doesn't have the West as a lynchpin will be viewed, and rightly so, as an existential crisis for the Western oligarchy and political elite - but I'm not so dumb as to confuse their prosperity with my own, and ideally this will serve as the catalyst for a better, more equitable and egalitarian Western society for my descendants when the now dominant powers in the rest of the world inevitably have their own crisis of stagnation and corruption.

Choose your ruling oligarchs wisely.

[Fasces]

I choose the ones that are held subservient to state power, not the ones that have made state power subservient to them.

[noemon]

The West is entering a period of corrupt complacency and decline - like the Ming before them. They'll be left behind for a century or two of humiliation, and hopefully come back better. The establishment of an independent economic structure that doesn't have the West as a lynchpin will be viewed, and rightly so, as an existential crisis for the Western oligarchy and political elite - but I'm not so dumb as to confuse their prosperity with my own, and ideally this will serve as the catalyst for a better, more equitable and egalitarian Western society for my descendants when the now dominant powers in the rest of the world inevitably have their own crisis of stagnation and corruption.

Several western countries have gone through crises of stagnation and corruption, they have gone through the entire circle of birth, puberty, maturity, hubris and downfall yet the mantle keeps passing to another western country however small and the centre of gravity remains west and this during periods when the others truly stood a chance. Today the west controls the vast majority of the planet and its resources, global finance & technology as well as global culture and education. She controls a lot more than she did during earlier times and China has much more to lose than the west does due to the trade balance.

Western cynicism has replaced reality with pessimism.

This is the base assumption of Western exceptionalism and morality that I take umbrage with. I don't believe an international system headed by former victims would be nearly as oppressive. The fundamental problem in the global community today is that every nation has been forcibly humbled by historical events and the legacy of colonialism except those in the West.

First of all, the west has been humbled, several western people have been humbled time and time again. Western people know pain, loss and humility as good as any other and are diverse enough to keep producing peoples worthy to lead.

Second, a system headed by "former victims" would be 10 times more oppressive but we do not even need to go there and say who is more or less that is shown from the relative political and social culture and not by the status of victimisation. Most importantly history proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that no power vacuum is ever left unoccupied.

[Fasces]

Several western countries have gone through crises of stagnation and corruption, they have gone through the entire circle of birth, puberty, maturity, hubris and downfall yet the mantle keeps passing to another western country however small and the centre of gravity remains west and this during periods when the others truly stood a chance. Today the west controls the vast majority of the planet and its resources, global finance & technology as well as global culture and education. She controls a lot more than she did during earlier times and China has much more to lose than the west does due to the trade balance.

Not the Western transnational elite. They have occupied a privileged position consistently since the Age of Discovery first enriched them and the Atlantic Revolutions in which they destroyed the Ancien Regime. This was, at the time, a good thing - but they have since the 1980s become a force of oppression and regression themselves, at the expense of the people, much like the kings before them. However, they are significantly more entrenched and stable, to the point that I do not personally believe that they can be removed within the West - only when forced by external forces, much like the dynastic system in China before it, the Edo system in Japan or the caste system in India.

In this case, it will be the Global South that does it - especially nations in Asia and Africa over the late 21st and 22nd centuries.

Second, a system headed by "former victims" would be 10 times more oppressive but we do not even need to go there and say who is more or less that is shown from the relative political and social culture and not by the status of victimisation. Most importantly history proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that no power vacuum is ever left unoccupied.

The simple fact is that China and India, in order to compete with the West, will have to fundamentally alter the players in the game and the way the game is played - or else fail in the face of the West's dominant position. This necessitates establishing a new, global, and egalitarian model of development in the former Global South, which can then act as a bloc in the face of Western hegemony and supplant it. There is no doubt in my mind that this bloc will itself succumb to the forces of corruption and tyranny in a few centuries, but this is the natural cycle of progress and will serve as a catalyst for Western improvement and social development.

[noemon]

Not the Western transnational elite. They have occupied a privileged position consistently since the Age of Discovery first enriched them and the Atlantic Revolutions in which they destroyed the Ancien Regime. This was, at the time, a good thing - but they have since the 1980s become a force of oppression and regression themselves, at the expense of the people, much like the kings before them. However, they are significantly more entrenched and stable, to the point that I do not personally believe that they can be removed within the West - only when forced by external forces, much like the dynastic system in China before it, the Edo system in Japan or the caste system in India.

I really don't know how you can say that, the western elites keep changing, falling, others rising as industries come and go industrialists give their way to other elites, the ancient regime is gone and we witness all types of elites coming and going.

The simple fact is that China and India, in order to compete with the West, will have to fundamentally alter the players in the game and the way the game is played - or else fail in the face of the West's dominant position. This necessitates establishing a new, global, and egalitarian model of development in the former Global South, which can then act as a bloc in the face of Western hegemony and supplant it. There is no doubt in my mind that this bloc will itself succumb to the forces of corruption and tyranny in a few centuries, but this is the natural cycle of progress and will serve as a catalyst for Western improvement and social development.

If they do that, kudos to them but they cannot even establish anything remotely egalitarian in their own countries, how do you reckon they will establish something like that globally?

The fact is it all comes down to liberalism vs authoritarianism and what kind of humans are produced by each type of civilisation. This fight is the one being played out for several thousands of years. Liberal civilisations/culture lose several battles but never the war. The west not only has the advantage in that, it also has the advantage in everything else as well.

[Unthinking Majority]

This is the base assumption of Western exceptionalism and morality that I take umbrage with. I don't believe an international system headed by former victims would be nearly as oppressive.

Go look at what the CCP does to its own people. They have no concept of human rights, they don't allow free speech or freedom of the press, they intimidate and jail people without trial not to mention disappear people (have you seen the "Tank Man" lately?), they jail and genocide ethnic minorities, they have total surveillance over their entire population and force them into social compliance using a 'social credit system", they're ripping democracy away from Hong Kong....

And you think the CPP will treat foreigners BETTER than their own people?!?

China has demonstrated a capacity for egalitarian and co-equal development over the last two decades that the West has not

Huh? China hasn't been communist in 30-40 years. China has literally the same high level of income inequality as the USA does: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... e_equality

I've never heard of an egalitarian country that has no guaranteed human rights and is ruled by a totalitarian fascist regime.

...you can argue that this is a ploy to buy votes, or to gain confidence, and that they intend to become evil snakes at some point in the future, but at this point you're justifying Western crimes on theoretical future Chinese or Indian crimes

"Justifying Western crimes"? Please name one single crime i'm proposing? It's not illegal to choose who you wish to trade with. You can't force me to shop at your store or buy your yardsale stuff on Kijiji, just like no country can force another country to trade with them, especially if they're stealing tons of your IP and government secrets, bribing your politicians, among a gazillion other crimes they commit. If China doesn't want to play nice they can suck it.

Future crimes? I'm talking about the very real crimes China is committing today against us (and their own people) and rightly assuming these crimes will increase in occurrence and scope as they increase in power and we decline.

[Fasces]

@noemon

No mate, the western elites keep changing, falling, others rising as industries come and go industrialists give their way to other elites.

Do they? News to me. You get a few new faces each generation, but the families and social networks are still there, as they have been for centuries.

If they do that, kudos to them but they cannot even establish anything remotely egalitarian in their own countries, how do you reckon they will establish something like that globally?

I disagree that they cannot - they have certainly been moving in positive directions in that regard. However, this speaks to the paradox we see internationally.

The West is at home, pluralistic. They advocate for different ways of thoughts and systems. Internationally, however, they are absolutist - there is only one system and all countries should follow it.

China is, at home, absolutist. They see pluralism as weakness ripe for Western exploitation (not unjustifiably). However, internationally, they are pluralistic - they have no ambition of exporting the China model and seem content to approach geopolitics in a Westphalian manner. They can create a new model of equitable global trade and bilateral relations, and have been for the past two decades.

The fact is it all comes down to liberalism vs authoritarianism and what kind of humans are produced by each type of civilisation. This fight is the one being played out for several thousands of years. Liberal civilisations/culture lose several battles but never the war. The west not only has the advantage in that, it also has the advantage in everything else as well.

This is a bizarre analysis. By the same logic, authoritarianism has also not lost the war - we haven't approached anything near the end of history. The truth is that it is cyclical. More democratic and egalitarian systems are developed, succumb to their own contradictions, and are replaced by more advanced authoritarian systems which address some of those contradictions, until they too succumb and so on and so on. We are in a period of recession as the Western system, based on a model of eternal growth through unsustainable development and colonial exploitation, starts to fail and the entrenched oligarch class starts to worry more about preserving their share of the resources and position than the health of Western society.

A century or two of humiliations will be good for the West.

@Unthinking Majority

They have no concept of human rights.

they don't allow free speech or freedom of the press

They don't allow unelected elites to control these institutions without restriction to advance their own interests at the expense of the people's, you mean.

they intimidate and jail people without trial

not to mention disappear people (have you seen the "Tank Man" lately?)

Maybe. For all I know he was checking out at the cashier next to me last week - I have no idea what his name, face, age, or residence is or was, and neither do you for that matter.

they jail and genocide ethnic minorities

I disagree with their proactive policing measures, but it isn't genocide.

they have total surveillance over their entire population

There is less a day to day presence of Chinese police and state structures in China than in the US, as someone that has experienced both.

and force them into social compliance using a 'social credit system"

No such thing, beyond a few pilot programs in some provinces and a private system run by Alibaba known as Sesame Credit which is no different than a US credit score.

they're ripping democracy away from Hong Kong

Hong Kong has literally never been democratic.

If China doesn't want to play nice they can suck it.

For the West, and Westerners such as yourself, 'play nice' is synonymous with 'know your place and know its below us'.

The average Chinese is content with their way of life. Chinese students abroad continue to support China even when exposed to the West, and they return in droves. And the average Iraqi, Yemeni, Guatemalan, etc are also happy that the Chinese don't decide to bomb them with regularity.

[noemon]

They see pluralism as weakness ripe for Western exploitation (not unjustifiably).

I don't think that is even remotely true regardless if it is "justifiable" in some philosophical & abstract plane of existence. The reality is that we do not actually know how the Chinese view "liberal pluralism" because they have never been interested in it and have never actually entertained it in any way shape or form. We assume and presume how we think they may be seeing it but for them this liberal concept is totally alien.

However, internationally, they are pluralistic - they have no ambition of exporting the China model and seem content to approach geopolitics in a Westphalian manner. They can create a new model of equitable global trade and bilateral relations, and have been for the past two decades.

The assertion that they are pluralistic is not based on anything at all, their behaviour shows that they are absolutist and monist in every thing they do. Pluralism to them being both alien and their worst enemy. They are mono-ethnic and mono-cultural. Their inability to impose their will is because they are not strong enough, the fact that they are totally reliant on the west does not prevent them to being extremely aggressive and we saw that both against the US and against Australia.

This is a bizarre analysis. By the same logic, authoritarianism has also not lost the war - we haven't approached anything near the end of history. The truth is that it is cyclical. More democratic and egalitarian systems are developed, succumb to their own contradictions, and are replaced by more advanced authoritarian systems which address some of those contradictions, until they too succumb and so on and so on. We are in a period of recession as the Western system, based on a model of eternal growth through unsustainable development and colonial exploitation, starts to fail and the entrenched oligarch class starts to worry more about preserving their share of the resources and position than the health of Western society.

God, this communist tape just keeps repeating itself ad infinitum, especially after the fall of the USSR western intellectuals stopped bothering about it as there was no point and now it has become the candy of preference. The west has managed to outgrow slavery, colonialism, post-colonialism, feudalism, human sacrifice, successfully every time. This comes back to the eternal fight between liberalism/authoritarianism, liberal societies have the capacity to reinvent themselves because the people are free to think so new leaders pop up and the mantle carries on.

Being free to think is what it all comes down to. Authoritarian societies expect their population to be complacent, they win in efficiency(like for like) but lose out in creativity. Problems require creative minds instead of cogs.


----------------------------

Some examples that I was thinking about: Greece vs Persia, Athens vs Sparta, Rome vs the tyrannical Greek diadochi, Constantinople vs Rome, Venice vs Constantinople, Florence vs Venice, Netherlands vs Britain, Britain vs Spain, France vs Europe, Europe vs Napoleon 2.0, US vs Britain, Entete vs Central Powers, WW2, US vs Russia. Liberalism triumphs over authoritarianism again and again and again.

Economic liberalism is so powerful that the whole of Europe is trying to force the UK to accept terms for not implementing liberal policies at a greater extent than Europe(level playing field). The whole of Europe has turned social-democratic in order to establish a safe distance(proxy space) between itself and the extremes so that she can deploy economic liberalism strategically and only when she has to like during crises. Same as any military strategist reserving the finest troops for when required or like a company saving cash reserves for a rainy day instead of going all out. The US and Trump have been going economically all out which means that when it deflates it will not have any more liberal policies to throw around to kickstart their economies again. That is what people do not appreciate about Obama's economics, he could have signalled to the US stock market to rally as any US president can do due to the privileged position of the dollar(allowing for almost infinite dollars without a blip in inflation) as Trump did and as many others before him did but Obama was prudent and wise. He truly cared about his legacy and to appeal to the really smart people who will write the history and not to the lowest common denominator day-trading ETF's.

[Unthinking Majority]

The average Chinese is content with their way of life. Chinese students abroad continue to support China even when exposed to the West, and they return in droves.

They sure do!

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/china- ... -1.5723846

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba ... -1.5609582

And the average Iraqi, Yemeni, Guatemalan, etc are also happy that the Chinese don't decide to bomb them with regularity.

China gets Russia to do their dirty work for them for free! Smart chaps.