Einar Tangen: U.S. Destroying World Order to Keep Hegemony
1mon 16d ago by lemmy.ml/u/yogthos in geopolitics@lemmy.ml from youtu.be
Chad Xi.jpeg
Do nothing.
Win.
And failing
46 minute: China's proposal
40 minute: divergence between elite and electorate
Is that true? At least for a war against Russia the majority seems willing to fight.
There's a reason all the parties in charge of the major European countries are polling under 20% now. Look at France, Germany, and UK as prime examples. The regimes are deeply unpopular. And even despite all the propaganda, vast majority of people don't have an interest in actually fighting Russia. AfD in Germany, RN and Progressive Front in France all have anti war platform. A party that's against the war just won massively in Bulgaria as well.
In Germany, no party in parliament would oppose a war against Russia. At most the AfD would, but the AfD seems to be split between pro Russia and pro USA forces. So if the US do their homework there won't be an opposition.
People on the street may oppose the war but they don't make the decision.
AfD is polling like at 30% now and it's by far the most popular party. So, when the next election comes they're very likely to be the dominant force in German politics. Especially given that the economy can only get worse in the mean time. And what do you think the chances of the US doing their homework are given what we see unfolding in Iran?
AfD is polling like at 30% now
Even with 49% they can't prevent the decision for war.
And what do you think the chances of the US doing their homework are given what we see unfolding in Iran?
I believe in Trump as a mad man figure head. The US are decoupling. They may have been surprised by the number of hits and the number of rockets but they couldn't expect a regime change. The shutting down of the strait was expected by them. It's the world that had to be eased into accepting the chaos that is going to come. A burning Middle East has always been the prediction for a war with Iran and it has always been said that it can't be conquered. The US has no invasion force there so the current situation is part of the plan. People accept it because it is explicable and thus excusable because of Trump.
The US is doing their homework in Europe. There will be age verification on the internet. The police is going to use Palantir. The economy will depend on US AI services. Europe will be ready when people don't accept Trump as an excuse anymore. The economy will switch to weapons manufacturing so the problems will be postponed.
Your original question was whether there is a disconnect between the public and the elites, and the answer is that there is. You're now moving to the discussion of whether AfD would actually be able to stop the war or not. That's a separate question. Also, there's a good chance it's a moot question given the economic shock from the war on Iran in Europe. It simply might not be possible for Europe to keep supporting Ukraine materially in the near future.
And I agree that the attack on Iran goes beyond Trump, but my point is that the execution was very much bungled in every way imaginable. If this was done under, say Obama, they would've come up with a solid pretext, got allied on board, and managed the narrative a lot more skilfully. Trump admin didn't bother with any of that, and this is creating real problems for the US geopolitically because everybody can see clearly what the empire is doing here. There isn't even attempt to hide it.
But the real target isn't actually Iran, the goal appears to be to disrupt energy shipments to Asia to create instability and dependence on US energy exports. This is the same playbook that was used to cut Europe off from cheap Russian energy. And once the US starts having influence over countries by controlling their energy supplies they will drive their politics to turn them into proxies against China the same way Europe was turned into a proxy against Russia.
Going back to Europe, the real question is how much of this the public is willing to swallow. The age verification and other ways to stifle free speech is not going to go over well when people are already angry. And switching to weapons manufacturing will necessitate further austerity. Personally, I don't think that's even possible to do in practical terms with the energy prices being what they are. Remember the whole plan to produce 1.5 million shells for Ukraine? I expect this will work out in a similar way. The EU will make a slush fund, a bunch of people will line their pockets, and nothing much will actually materialize in the end.
That’s a separate question.
Sorry, that was sloppy. My point is that the AfD is not the majority of the public so there is not a complete disconnect.
It simply might not be possible for Europe to keep supporting Ukraine materially
It will be funny if Europe switches to a planned economy. As long as the raw materials are available I expect Europe to deliver.
There isn’t even attempt to hide it.
I think the US fundamentally switched communication strategies. The internet reveals everything. It has become impossible to maintain moral superiority for neocolonial wars. The US embraced that and installed a president who hides the truth in plain sight.
Thiel and the scapegoat theories remind me too much of Trump. https://read.lukeburgis.com/p/peter-thiel-on-rene-girard
But the real target isn’t actually Iran, the goal appears to be to disrupt energy shipments to Asia
Agree. I read something about Alaska terminals. Though I think Iran would be helpful for supply routes against Russia, like it was in ww2.
Personally, I don’t think that’s even possible to do in practical terms with the energy prices being what they are.
Tariffs are supposed to end the US trade deficit which gifted resources to the US. I think the higher energy costs replace that. At least Germany always handed some surplus over to the US. So I expect the economy to keep working.
AfD looks like it's the single most popular party now, and their support keeps growing while other parties are declining. Seems that them connecting the war to the economic decline people are feeling is a key reason. Polls also show the war to be unpopular, for example: https://en.yenisafak.com/world/most-germans-want-merz-to-hold-direct-talks-with-putin-poll-reveals-3714541
And even with a planned economy, the big issue is energy. Europe is now almost entirely dependent on the US, and until that problem is solved there's not much that can change.
And agree, the US is now an openly predatory power that's squeezing their vassals for all it can. The mask is completely off now.
The big difference from WW2 is modern China which is the biggest industrial base in the world by far. What I expect will happen is a lot of Eurasia will get integrated in trade over land. Pakistan already opened six routes from Iran just recently. We're likely going to see more of that.
The other flaw with the American plan is that it assumes fossil fuels are the only game in town. I expect Asia will now double down on Chinese solar panels as an alternative, and the demand for oil and gas is never going to come back to previous levels.
And yeah the whole tariff policy was a huge failure. The US industry is actually shrinking right now. But again, Europe needs to get off American energy to actually start developing. Chinese renewables are the obvious choice, but seems like there's still a lot of sinophobia in the EU.
What I expect will happen is a lot of Eurasia will get integrated in trade over land.
Which is funny
One of Mackinder's personal objectives was to warn Britain that its traditional reliance on sea power would become a weakness as improved land transport opened up the Heartland for invasion and/or industrialisation (Sempa, 2000).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Geographical_Pivot_of_History
But again, Europe needs to get off American energy to actually start developing.
Germany gave up its solar industries. It only makes sense as a concession to America.
Without a Trump impeachment I assume that the West still has strategies to come out on top against China in collaboration with the USA.
I don't see how the west can come out on top against China myself. The west is entirely dependent on manufacturing in China and many industries that China has an effective monopoly on. There's no path towards replicating that in the foreseeable future. On top of that, it's not like China is standing still. They caught up and are now surpassing the west precisely because the rate of development there is much faster. Otherwise catching up would not have been possible in the first place.
That makes we wonder why Iraq received the democracy treatment and not China. They must still believe that they can contain China. Why else would they show the world their war crimes, ecological destruction and corruption instead of presenting themselves as reliable partners?
The only way to win would be nuclear war but then why wait any longer? Do they hope that they can take out Russia? Do they still bet on robots and AI? I have no idea what the exit strategy could be but they behave as if they have one.
I mean they tried to do a color revolution in China in 1989 and failed. Also, it's kind of weird to compare Iraq to China given that they have nothing in common.
The reason that the US is showing the world their true face now is because they don't have anything to offer now. Back in the day, the US used to be a manufacturing powerhouse, it lead in science and technology, and it was a key part of the global economic system. Today, China is the biggest trading partner for most countries, the US financial system is no longer central to world trade, and the US has lost its technological edge. So, all it can do now is squeeze as much blood as it can out of its remaining vassals and cannibalize them. Which is precisely what's happening.
Meanwhile, a nuclear war would be a loss for absolutely everyone. Even the oligarchs in the US understand that they'd be living the rest of their lives like rats in a bunker in that scenario. They're much rather rule over diminished empire than do that.
I don't think the US expects to take out Russia anymore, but they do want to burn Europe down before they retrench. The worst possible scenario from American perspective would be for Europe to get economically integrated with the East. And then deal with a big Eurasian bloc as a competitor. And since they have nothing to offer Europe, they're just bleeding both Europe and Russia out while poaching what they can from Europe in the process.
The goal is likely to break up the EU and then negotiate with individual European countries from the position of absolute power. Wars in Ukraine and Iran act as a vehicle towards this end, making Europe entirely dependent on the US for energy and ensuring relations with Russia continue to be hostile.
The main focus for the US will likely be in their own hemisphere going forward. So, it's going to be a bad time for Canada and Latin America.
Also, it’s kind of weird to compare Iraq to China given that they have nothing in common.
Iraq was about to abandon the petrodollar. If they care about upholding their reign, why not also wage the war against China then, when the technological lead was bigger. They have let it pass because they had other options and they still must have them now.
So, all it can do now is squeeze as much blood as it can out of its remaining vassals and cannibalize them.
Europe could have rejected Ukrainian Nato membership and could have prevented the escalation and the squeeze. For some reason they agreed.
Even the oligarchs in the US understand that they’d be living the rest of their lives like rats in a bunker in that scenario.
Nuclear winter and hunger is worse than the radiation. The elite will have enough food though. Moderna and others will take care of cancer for the masses. AI preserves the knowledge.
The elite could have transferred enough of their resources into a multipolar world to have a good life. Instead they fight. That doesn't look like they try to avoid the bunkers. They want the power.
The goal is likely to break up the EU and then negotiate with individual European countries
That requires South America and Europe to voluntarily stay with them. With a technological lead, China could support one country after the other to break free. This would be a reverse cold war and the US are burning all goodwill in advance.
Bleeding Europe dry would seed even more resentments. This is a fragile strategy. It could create the divergence between elite and electorate. So I think resources will be available, just not enough to become independent and the EU will stay together for maximum weapon production.
The problem for the US is that China is not genocidal Germany. The rest of the world will not unite against it. Unlike Russia China won't conquer Taiwan. At best the US can hope to transfer the anger against Russia onto China if China gets involved in the war there. But if China doesn't get officially involved they still need a plan to contain China. Selfisolation won't work and would only be hilarious, given the Chinese history.
Iraq was about to abandon the petrodollar. If they care about upholding their reign, why not also wage the war against China then, when the technological lead was bigger. They have let it pass because they had other options and they still must have them now.
When exactly do you think there was a window to wage a war on China which is a nuclear power? There's a reason the US won't even dare to attack DPRK let alone China. They let it pass because they had no options and China outplayed them. The US isn't the main character. Other sovereign countries make plans and have agency of their own. China's planning and policy proved to be more successful than that of the US. Americans banked on doing political capture in China, and expected that integration with the western capitalist system would eventually displace the power of the government and then large capitalists would betray the country. That never happened, and that's the reason the relations are increasingly hostile.
However, as we saw during the tariff war, China has the US by the balls. All they have to do is stop the export of stuff like rare earths, and the entire US economy grinds to a halt. The US can't even produce weapons without these exports.
Europe could have rejected Ukrainian Nato membership and could have prevented the escalation and the squeeze. For some reason they agreed.
It couldn't because Europe is not independent. It is a vassal of the empire and it does what the US tells Europe to do. Same applies to south Korea, Japan, Canada, and Australia. These are not sovereign countries with independent policy.
Nuclear winter and hunger is worse than the radiation. The elite will have enough food though. Moderna and others will take care of cancer for the masses. AI preserves the knowledge.
Do you remember the pandemic when people started going stir crazy after a few months of the lockdowns? Now imagine the most narcissistic people on this planet having to live in a bunker for years. They would go nuts after a few weeks tops. Of course, they have indeed been talking about such plans, and it's kind of hilarious. One big problem is that they would need staff, and once the society collapses there's no reason for the staff not to turn on them. https://archive.ph/eK4Dp
Again, what possible benefit would there be for the rich to live like that over ruling over half the world? It's a nonsensical proposition. They want power, but not at the cost of their own comfort. The current level of conflict doesn't affect them directly in any way. It's like a game of risk for them where they move pieces around on the board. A nuclear war would have direct and sever consequences. If they didn't care about these consequences then they would've started one with USSR during the Cold War.
That requires South America and Europe to voluntarily stay with them. With a technological lead, China could support one country after the other to break free. This would be a reverse cold war and the US are burning all goodwill in advance.
We already see how this strategy is working in both South America and Europe. China is not all powerful, and it's very far from South America. It can do little to challenge the US there in practical terms, especially when the US navy starts doing active piracy on the high seas. Europe on the other hand, could work with China, but the leadership in Europe continues to dance to American tune.
Bleeding Europe dry would seed even more resentments. This is a fragile strategy. It could create the divergence between elite and electorate. So I think resources will be available, just not enough to become independent and the EU will stay together for maximum weapon production.
We see precisely this happening right now, but look at what's happening in the Middle East. That's American plan for Europe too. The EU will collapse, individual states will be thrown into chaos, and there could be a long period of infighting, terrorism, and insurgencies. This will make the whole region volatile which works to American advantage. It's basically a scorched earth policy. If the US can't dominate Eurasia, then they will do everything to throw it into chaos. That's the strategy that's already been used in many other regions. Just look at Latin America or Africa as an example where the US regularly conducts coups and installs dictatorships. Europe is next on the menu.
The problem for the US is that China is not genocidal Germany. The rest of the world will not unite against it. Unlike Russia China won’t conquer Taiwan. At best the US can hope to transfer the anger against Russia onto China if China gets involved in the war there. But if China doesn’t get officially involved they still need a plan to contain China. Selfisolation won’t work and would only be hilarious, given the Chinese history.
Yes, global perception of China is a big problem for the US. And we already see Asia largely gravitating towards China. But the US still has India, South Korea, Japan, and the Philippines to create tensions in the region. The question is the one of resources. It's becoming clear that the US is very strained now, and they may have no choice but to retrench. Empires don't last forever, and as much as Americans see themselves as being exceptional, they're not going to be any different in the end.
When exactly do you think there was a window to wage a war on China
Always. The consequences of nuclear fallouts weren't worth it but that changes if there is no other opportunity left.
It couldn’t because Europe is not independent.
America needs Europe against China. What would they do if Europe says no? Nuclear war against Europe?
there’s no reason for the staff not to turn on them.
As there is now. Let the guards have family in other bunkers. Offer access to medical specialists elsewhere. But why live in a bunker if being on a ship in the Pacific is enough after some days?
They want power, but not at the cost of their own comfort.
Then why is the conflict not resolved?
It can do little to challenge the US there in practical terms, especially when the US navy starts doing active piracy on the high seas.
For now. At one point China has the better technology and will put an end to it. The US would be opened like China was opened. The US can't isolate for eternity.
If the US can’t dominate Eurasia, then they will do everything to throw it into chaos.
Who does the research for them instead? It would accelerate the Chinese technology takeover
It’s becoming clear that the US is very strained now, and they may have no choice but to retrench.
I think it's deception. Europe is still an ally. It's good cop, bad cop. We are at the beginning of the Iran war, not at the end. The US was prepared to fight two major wars at the same time. Like Syria, they will take their time to arrange the opposition.
Always. The consequences of nuclear fallouts weren’t worth it but that changes if there is no other opportunity left.
Again, there's zero rational advantage to nuclear winter over simply having hegemony over the western hemisphere. I'm really glad that even the oligarchs aren't this psychopathic.
America needs Europe against China. What would they do if Europe says no? Nuclear war against Europe?
America does not need Europe. What they need to make sure is that Europe doesn't become independent and economically integrated with China and Russia. So, the solution is to burn Europe down. This is very clearly what the US is doing right now. If the US actually needed Europe then they wouldn't be pursuing a destructive strategy against Europe. They'd be doing what they did during the Cold War when they poured a ton of resources into propping Europe up.
As there is now. Let the guards have family in other bunkers. Offer access to medical specialists elsewhere. But why live in a bunker if being on a ship in the Pacific is enough after some days?
And how long before one of the guards decides they don't need the rich baby anymore and they can just run the show themselves?
Then why is the conflict not resolved?
Because the conflict has no direct impact on them. I literally just explained this in my last reply. The current conflict is just a game for these people. There are zero personal consequences. They already have more wealth and power than they know what to do with. They will be comfortable no matter what happens, unless there is a nuclear holocaust. That's literally the only negative scenario for them that they would want to avoid.
For now. At one point China has the better technology and will put an end to it. The US would be opened like China was opened. The US can’t isolate for eternity.
I think the most likely scenario is that the US implodes, but China also hasn't been an expansionist power historically. I don't see any reason to expect China to do what the US is doing going forward.
Who does the research for them instead? It would accelerate the Chinese technology takeover
Creating instability is what the US does to slow down China. If Europe is thrown into chaos that will slow down Eurasian integration significantly. The same way the wars and terrorism did in West Asia. Europe isn't indispensable in any way. Also, if you look at research spending, you can see that Europe is a drop in a bucket compared to the US even now.
I think it’s deception. Europe is still an ally. It’s good cop, bad cop. We are at the beginning of the Iran war, not at the end. The US was prepared to fight two major wars at the same time. Like Syria, they will take their time to arrange the opposition.
We'll find out soon enough. I don't see any deception here myself. The US is very much strained economically, the numbers don't lie. The US lacks industrial base and isn't able to produce a lot of the things it needs. Europe is a burden for the US right now. It has never been an ally either. It's just been a convenient pawn to use against USSR during the Cold War. Now that USSR no longer exists, Europe has little value. If you think that the US would fight for Europe then prepare to be very surprised going forward.
Again, there’s zero rational advantage to nuclear winter over simply having hegemony over the western hemisphere
True, but how can the US defend their hegemony? People will see the better phones, the nicer clothes and the better entertainment from China.
If the US actually needed Europe then they wouldn’t be pursuing a destructive strategy against Europe.
They remove our freedom and take our energy intense processes but I don't see the full destruction.
And how long before one of the guards decides they don’t need the rich baby anymore?
As long as it takes. Like on a ship, mutinity is not useful if you need access to harbours.
The current conflict is just a game for these people.
I agree but the negotiation position of the US elite is declining. Why don't they make the deal now? Why the war? Iran will demand reparations and China will grant it.
I don’t see any reason to expect China to do what the US is doing going forward.
Mercy for the colonized and the benefits of the world working together. I don't expect conquests but I expect that they will dismantle US hegemony, to remove its threat and to liberate its people. Free healthcare for all. That doesn't mean a war against the US but support for opposition parties in Latin America.
Europe isn’t indispensable in any way. Also, if you look at research spending, you can see that Europe is a drop in a bucket compared to the US even now.
The US doesn't have the population to compete with China. If they can get the European immigrants that is not such a big problem but without good schools in Europe that's throwing away too many resources.
If you think that the US would fight for Europe then prepare to be very surprised going forward.
I don't expect that. I expect that the US wants Europe to fight for them, to occupy Russia while the US take care of China.
True, but how can the US defend their hegemony? People will see the better phones, the nicer clothes and the better entertainment from China.
They can't, but the rulers don't care about the people or their wellbeing. They are just a resource to extract value from. The life for the average American will get worse, but as we see in places like Latin America, people will likely accept it. You'll see a situation where 80% of the population lives in favelas and then top 20% continue as if nothing happened.
They remove our freedom and take our energy intense processes but I don’t see the full destruction.
It will happen. Europe is being pushed into a war with Russia right now, and unless something dramatically changes there will either be a crisis of austerity or an all out war. Either way, I don't see a path where things in Europe start getting better unless relations with Russia are normalized.
As long as it takes. Like on a ship, mutinity is not useful if you need access to harbours.
What do they need access for exactly? The power oligarchs wield is a social contract. Once that contract is gone they're at the mercy of their own security forces. They have no way to exercise power over them.
I agree but the negotiation position of the US elite is declining. Why don’t they make the deal now? Why the war? Iran will demand reparations and China will grant it.
I feel like we're going in circles here. I've already explained this above. The purpose of the war in Iran is to cut Asia off from cheap energy, slow its development, and make more countries become dependent on the US energy exports. Then create problems from China to slow its development and trade. Exactly the same formula playing out with Europe and Russia right now, except transplanted to Asia. China having to grant reparation to Iran will itself be a drain on resources. Everything China will have to do to stabilize its region is resources that cannot be spent on further advancement.
Mercy for the colonized and the benefits of the world working together. I don’t expect conquests but I expect that they will dismantle US hegemony, to remove its threat and to liberate its people. Free healthcare for all. That doesn’t mean a war against the US but support for opposition parties in Latin America.
Sure, and the US will, in turn, pursue their strategy of doing piracy in the western hemisphere, abucting heads of governments, coups, regime change operations, and so on. There is a long history of them doing this in Latin America. And USSR providing help to these countries did not change the course of things. There's little reason to expect that China can do better here.
The US doesn’t have the population to compete with China. If they can get the European immigrants that is not such a big problem but without good schools in Europe that’s throwing away too many resources.
The idea will be to turn Europe into something akin to Latin America. There will be compadre regimes which will allow the US to continue to extract labor and resources. If the relative living standards in the US will be higher, then a lot of upper middle class will want to migrate to escape the conditions. They will have nowhere else to go because, let's face it, Europeans are far too racist to migrate to China.
I don’t expect that. I expect that the US wants Europe to fight for them, to occupy Russia while the US take care of China.
It's pretty clear that Europe doesn't have the capacity to occupy Russia, but I agree that throwing Europe into a war with Russia is very much where the US is steering things.
great minds think alike. lol
They can’t, but the rulers don’t care about the people or their wellbeing. They are just a resource to extract value from. The life for the average American will get worse, but as we see in places like Latin America, people will likely accept it. You’ll see a situation where 80% of the population lives in favelas and then top 20% continue as if nothing happened.
The idea will be to turn Europe into something akin to Latin America. There will be compadre regimes which will allow the US to continue to extract labor and resources. If the relative living standards in the US will be higher, then a lot of upper middle class will want to migrate to escape the conditions. They will have nowhere else to go because, let’s face it, Europeans are far too racist to migrate to China.
i shared similar realizations irl the other week (except i was saying that the upper middle class americans will always refuse to move to china and for the same reason) and now i've been ostracized from my poker player group. lol
the lengths to witch people go through to stick their heads in the sand never ceases to surprise me.
Same, like it's really obvious what's happening here, but people keep pretending that it's something other than it is. And when you point these things out they get really upset. It's like they think that if they just keep ignoring reality it will go away.
top 20% continue as if nothing happened.
For a decade. Asia with China will out-innovate the US sphere. It would work if only the US had the AI and robots but as it is, it would recreate the Ming dynasty and the US would fall back. Keeping people poor doesn't bring innovation.
where things in Europe start getting better unless relations with Russia are normalized.
Never will there be normalization under US influence. We are going to war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grand_Chessboard
Once that contract is gone they’re at the mercy of their own security forces.
There are just fewer people but the contract remains. The bunkers are for the elite. Normal people will live with radiation. The guards have family who need medical treatment against cancer or are like sailors on a ship, trained right.
I feel like we’re going in circles here
Sorry, it wasn't meant that way. Iran war is a minor inhibition. China will build pipelines from Russia and Iran. They already have Air to Air missiles that take down Rafales, so no longterm disruption of the pipelines.
The US cannot play it safe. They have to take down China now or they are trapped in their diminishing sphere of influence. I meant that if they choose to live in their sphere, on the mercy of China not intervening, China will get into the position to help Iran demand reparations from the US. So why create that useless destruction that buys months at best? I can't imagine anything but further escalations.
And USSR providing help to these countries did not change the course of things. There’s little reason to expect that China can do better here.
China will have the technological lead. That will make a huge difference. They have the steel to drown the US navy in ships.
They will have nowhere else to go because, let’s face it, Europeans are far too racist to migrate to China.
Nerds will go to Asia. All the automation needs nerds. The US cannot win with white racist normies alone.
For a decade. Asia with China will out-innovate the US sphere. It would work if only the US had the AI and robots but as it is, it would recreate the Ming dynasty and the US would fall back. Keeping people poor doesn’t bring innovation.
It doesn't matter how much China out innovates the US. The US will just become a hermit kingdom. It's already happening. Take EVs for example, US companies can't compete so they just ban them. Same with phones, solar panels, and so on. Again, you're not looking at this properly. The only thing the oligarchs care is maintaining the feudal relations with the workers. They will have access to whatever toys they want from around the world, they're not the ones who will be limited by isolation. Think of the US as a giant slave work camp.
Never will there be normalization under US influence. We are going to war.
Right, that's exactly what's happening. Unless Europeans manage to overthrow the current regimes, they will be sacrificed by the empire in an attempt to hobble Russia.
There are just fewer people but the contract remains. The bunkers are for the elite. Normal people will live with radiation. The guards have family who need medical treatment against cancer or are like sailors on a ship, trained right.
What's the contract. Where do elites derive their power from exactly here? What stops the top guard from shooting the oligarch and taking his place? The oligarch doesn't possess any inherent value in the system. A coup would happen very quickly.
China will build pipelines from Russia and Iran.
But the target isn't China it's the rest of Asia that the US wants to turn into chaos to bog China's progress down. China relies on a stable international environment to develop. The US is creating chaos which dampens trade and development.
They have to take down China now or they are trapped in their diminishing sphere of influence.
It's obvious that the US is not able to do that given that they can't even defeat Iran. The window of opportunity has closed long ago.
I meant that if they choose to live in their sphere, on the mercy of China not intervening, China will get into the position to help Iran demand reparations from the US. So why create that useless destruction that buys months at best? I can’t imagine anything but further escalations.
China can't force the US to pay reparations. At the end of the day the US is also a nuclear superpower. What we're seeing happen is that the world is moving towards multipolarity where no single power can dictate things. China isn't going to replace the US as a global hegemon going forward. There will be spheres of influence.
China will have the technological lead. That will make a huge difference. They have the steel to drown the US navy in ships.
The US had a technological lead over USSR in a lot of areas, it was a bigger economy too. Yet, that didn't stop USSR from developing and being a global power.
Nerds will go to Asia. All the automation needs nerds. The US cannot win with white racist normies alone.
I agree, but I don't think Americans realize this. That's the problem with being racist, you genuinely end up believing you're superior to others. That's really a big part of the reason the west is now so shocked to realize that China is pulling ahead. It was taken as given that white people were smarter, more creative, and more innovative, and that the west would always be the peak of development in the world. When you keep sniffing your own farts for over a century, it's hard to accept that other people are just as clever as you are.
They will have access to whatever toys they want from around the world, they’re not the ones who will be limited by isolation. Think of the US as a giant slave work camp.
China und the Osman empire were isolating themselves. They were broken up by smuggling desirable goods in. That not only drew their fortunes but created structures outside of the control of the empires.
they will be sacrificed by the empire in an attempt to hobble Russia.
I agree but I think it is a joined decision. Europeans could stand up now and let their people know.
What stops the top guard from shooting the oligarch
Like today, there are other guard companies and the heir will take over, from another bunker. All the top guard gets is control over one bunker, until reenforcement arrives. In general, people will live outside of bunkers, with shorter lives.
China relies on a stable international environment to develop.
Still? Unless they attack China, or support a navy blockade against China, I think China only needs Russia for food and resources.
It’s obvious that the US is not able to do that given that they can’t even defeat Iran.
Have they aimed for defeat? There was no ground force. After Syria I give the US time to rise their army.
The window of opportunity has closed long ago.
I agree, unless they go nuclear, or manage to topple Russia. A navy blockade with no other source for food will lead to defeat for China.
China can’t force the US to pay reparations.
China will have medical innovation that the US billionaires will need to avoid death a bit longer.
Yet, that didn’t stop USSR from developing and being a global power.
Yet they couldn't prevent the US from influencing Iran and Afghanistan and the USSR population was ready for change after years of shortages.
I agree, but I don’t think Americans realize this.
Americans don't, but the elite does. They invented race to make lower class white be happy with their situation.
It was taken as given that white people were smarter, more creative,
China was always a serious threat. The elite can't have ignored it. They must have a plan.
China und the Osman empire were isolating themselves. They were broken up by smuggling desirable goods in. That not only drew their fortunes but created structures outside of the control of the empires.
Sure, but the question isn't what's going to happen, but what the oligarchs are likely to do to preserve their power. These are not the same. When you look at history, the collapse of empires tends to be fairly predictable in retrospect, and you often wonder how people didn't see it coming and how they could make such idiotic decisions in face of all logic. But hindsight is 20/20 as the saying goes. When people are making decisions in the moment, they rarely have the full picture and make the best decision that would be possible at the time.
Like today, there are other guard companies and the heir will take over, from another bunker. All the top guard gets is control over one bunker, until reenforcement arrives. In general, people will live outside of bunkers, with shorter lives.
Today, you have a much more complex system. If a guard killed an oligarch then the state would prosecute them. There are checks and balances, the legal system, different branches of government, military, police, secret services. All of these sophisticated systems were created to ensure current power relations. This would obviously not be the case in some oligarch bunker. It's not going to be a sophisticated society. It would be a small tribe.
Still? Unless they attack China, or support a navy blockade against China, I think China only needs Russia for food and resources.
I agree, I think that in the long run China will be fine. And pushing Russia and China together was a huge geopolitical blinder on the part of the US. But, the best move US has now is to continue destabilizing the world keeping Russia and China occupied with putting out fires all around them.
Have they aimed for defeat? There was no ground force. After Syria I give the US time to rise their army.
They absolutely aimed for defeat. They thought that decapitation would work, and they tried doing a color revolution. They didn't aim for a military defeat, but rather for some internal uprising by destroying the economy through sanctions and blockades, while attacking the leadership. It didn't work out, so now we see the US pulling back to a blockade.
I agree, unless they go nuclear, or manage to topple Russia. A navy blockade with no other source for food will lead to defeat for China.
That's why the US went after Russia first. They needed to take Russia off the board, and China obviously realizes this hence why the will ensure that Russia continues to be stable.
China will have medical innovation that the US billionaires will need to avoid death a bit longer.
Like I said, they will have enough resources to either steal it or buy it for themselves.
Yet they couldn’t prevent the US from influencing Iran and Afghanistan and the population was ready for change after years of shortages.
But that's my point. That's what multipolarity will look like. Nobody is going to have any absolute influence over any region.
China was always a serious threat. The elite can’t have ignored it. They must have a plan.
I think you're giving them far too much credit. Just go read through Epstein emails, it quickly becomes clear that these people aren't exceptional in any way. They're not smarter than you or me. They just happened to win the birth lottery and ended up with a bunch of money they inherited. They're not smarter than everyone else.
They’re not smarter than you or me.
I can't speak for you, apart from noting your constant stream of outstanding posts, but the elite must be much more intelligent than me. There is ruthless competition and the people in control will be as far removed from me as in any other competitive field like sports, art or science.
Epstein seems to have some form of dyslexia. I wouldn't judge his intelligence by his mails and I wouldn't judge the elite by his friends.
Neither Trump nor Epstein will be part of the inner circle that makes the fundamental decisions.
Another argument against self-isolation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Central_Command
That name is a commitment.
There have been numerous studies done showing that luck and not skill is the primary factor in success. What matters is the connections your family has, the initial capital you get which allows you to fail over and over. The free time, the networking you're able to do when you go to private schools. It's not a case of Darwinian selection where the best and smartest people rise to the top. It's a case of a birth lottery where people born into wealth simply have far more opportunity than a regular person. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/beautiful-minds/the-role-of-luck-in-life-success-is-far-greater-than-we-realized
And 1983, when CENTCOM was established, was a completely different world. The material conditions today have changed dramatically. Back then the US was the biggest industrial economy, and it led the strongest economic bloc. So, it could have the ambitions of global domination. Today, it's a fading power and it's in a death spiral. Empires exist in a state of dynamic equilibrium where they have to exercise control over their vassals in order to extract wealth from them. When material factors change, such as new technological developments, the cost of control can become higher than the rate of extraction. That's an inflection point when the empire starts to die. As more countries free themselves from the yoke of the empire, there are less resources left to keep the rest in check, and that's how you end up in a spiral of collapse. Eventually the imperial core starts getting hollowed out to maintain the periphery.
This is precisely what we see happening with the US today. The US domestic economy is crashing, they are unable to take on their adversaries because new technologies like drones and hypersonics have changed the dynamic of combat and the existing doctrine no longer works. So, the US is forced to start retrenching. And this process started a decade ago with Obama pivoting to Asia. A pivot implies pivoting away from somewhere, and that somewhere was Europe. The empire had to make a choice, and they decided contesting China was the priority. But as we see now, that's proving too much of a challenge. And here we see another key technological advancement come into play which is cheap renewable energy. The US derived a lot of its economic power from the petrodollar and control over global energy shipments with its navy. Now that's starting to become irrelevant.
If the elite is average then the clever people have no excuse for not outsmarting them. We face global warming and as I think, nuclear war, because nobody told the clever people to come up with a better plan?
Again, read the paper I just linked. It explains that it's the opportunities that matter not the smarts. You can be a genius, but if you're stuck doing slave labor in a sweatshop that's not gonna help you much. The best possible thing that can happen at this point is that the US has a USSR style collapse, and the world moves on.
The paper says that it takes luck to succeed. So there are not only intelligent billionaires. But it's a simulation of isolated accounts. The elite is a network of people. If they self-select like a university then the center of the network should be aware of their dead end situation and take counter-measures. Those may fail but if they seem stupid to everybody then they were a deception. E.g. the Vietnam war was lost but fiat money was established.
The key point of the paper is that you don't need to be exceptional in any way, you just can't be a complete fuckup. What matters the most are the opportunities that you get. Success doesn't come from these people being exceptional, it comes from them having the freedom to fail over and over until they hit on something that works, and having access to resources and personal connections that make it possible to take their idea to the end.
And the other thing to realize is that western system is competing with others like in Russia, China, and Iran. Those systems have different selection pressures, and they end up putting different kinds of people in positions of power. So, the question becomes whether people making decisions in the west are smarter than their adversaries. I would argue that they're not.
freedom to fail over and over until they hit on something that works
Startup culture brought that to anybody studying STEM.
So, the question becomes whether people making decisions in the west are smarter than their adversaries.
That's the big question.
I think Russia fell for the trap. The future is in the East. Why care about the European part? Instead of the Ukrainian war they should have moved their capital to Vladivostok.
Iran looks clever, but I think Syria was regime changed to make Iran possible. I would even say the war in Ukraine exists primarily to take Russia out of Syria. The current war doesn't fit to that level of preparation. So I am undecided on Iran right now.
China must have the manpower to have a dedicated analyst for everybody in Washington. They seem to do everything right. I just have the feeling of the start of WW2. It looked easy and the logistic nightmares of the east weren't visible.
If America is run by lucky billionaires and trust fund babies then China is bound to win. But there is also old money. The people who used opium to break up China, which were also Americans, could have the cunningness to do it a second time.
The swiftness of the Syrian takeover shows that the US haven't lost it.
Startup culture brought that to anybody studying STEM.
Not really, the people working at startups are implementing what VCs want to fund.
I think Russia had little choice. They were not going to tolerate NATO putting nukes that could hit Moscow under 5 min. Russia's only rational option was to draw a red line, or NATO would just continue pushing.
Syria was very much taken out to weaken the axis of resistance in West Asia, but so far that doesn't seem to have played a big role. Iran is also in a very strong position because they're already used to sanctions and economic pressure. They will survive. However, the west is very much not prepared for what's coming.
The other big difference is in mentality. Iranians know that the war is existential for them. Their society understands why they need to make sacrifices to win the war. For the west, this is a war of choice, and there will be massive public backlash as the standard of living continues to drop. It's already likely that there will be a 2008 style crash even if the war ended tomorrow, but there's really no chance of anything getting better for months to come.
And I think we'll have to wait and see, but my view is that material reality is what matters in the end. China controls manufacturing and production of critical resources like the rare earths. This puts China in a very strong position relative to the US. And the war on Iran only shifts the balance further because it's depleting the existing stockpiles the US still has.
Russia’s only rational option was to draw a red line
Or move to Vladivostok
but so far that doesn’t seem to have played a big role.
Israel has only limited opposition in Lebanon and Syria.
there will be a 2008 style crash even if the war ended tomorrow
Especially if it limits the Chinese dept with inflation.
material reality is what matters in the end.
It does, but the US has a propaganda machine that could postpone the end long enough that new sources become available or AI takes over.
Or move to Vladivostok
And what do they do when NATO takes over everything west of Vladivastok?
Israel has only limited opposition in Lebanon and Syria.
Israel is a country of 10 mil people without any significant industry. It also shares no border with Iran. They're not a direct military threat to Iran.
And I don't see what new sources will become available. The problem isn't lack of resources, it's with the economic incentives being misaligned. I don't see AI fixing that. This is a good read on the subject incidentally https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2021/08/the-value-of-nothing-capital-versus-growth/
And what do they do when NATO takes over everything west of Vladivastok?
Fight, but with a working capital and with a chance of winning the European population over.
They’re not a direct military threat to Iran.
Apart from the bombings. But the reverse, threatening the middle east, including Israel, was Iran's defence against an American attack. Without Syria the threat is much smaller. Taking out Syria must have limited the impact on Israel. It suggests that the Iran war wasn't planned by Trump and that more can be expected than the bombing so far.
The problem isn’t lack of resources, it’s with the economic incentives being misaligned.
Thanks for the link.
I believe there is only a limited number of capable managers. America can't manage everything so it makes sense to take the profitable businesses. The skill lies in managing the monopolies and politically defend them, which requires political manipulation. They have the spy infrastructure and military to make that possible.
The rare earth situation shouldn't have happened. How could China build a moat there? It can be incompetence, but it also helps to paint China as a threat to the rest of the world.
I think the US don't want to solve the Chinese threat economically. As the article says, they build moats and not businesses. With AI though, they could be in every market and deny China any profit.
Another option would be if China fractures into smaller countries. China would become manageable. Unfortunately for the US, China has uncovered the US spy network by hacking the US payroll system and it seems that there was a cleanup in Shanghai during Covid, as far as I know the biggest opposition to Beijing. Still, like Syria, the US may have the network to create a successful revolution.
But as I said, I think they will go nuclear because China is too strong.
Fight, but with a working capital and with a chance of winning the European population over.
You realize that fighting when you're in a position of strength is a better idea right. And winning European population over has little practical value. The public hates all the leaders as is, and there's nothing they can do about it. The west is a democracy for the rich not the plebs.
Without Syria the threat is much smaller.
Hormuz says otherwise.
How could China build a moat there? I
Simple, China has a state driven economy that is capable of planning decades into the future. To give you an idea here, China identified rare earths advantage back in 1987, and they've worked on securing it this whole time. This level of foresight, planning, and coordination is not possible in the west. Meanwhile, allowing existing industry to fade is an artifact of selection pressures. The west is dominated by market dynamics, and markets select for low risk/high profit ventures. Doing any physical production can never compete with stuff like software and services here. That's the mechanic that systemically shifted industry out of western countries. As long as the current capitalist system persists, there's no path to fixing the problem.
And they've been outplayed with AI as well. You just have to look at these two charts here to see how fucked the US is https://hai.stanford.edu/news/inside-the-ai-index-12-takeaways-from-the-2026-report
Another option would be if China fractures into smaller countries.
Have you considered the reverse is much more likely? Which country do you think has more social cohesion and stability right now, China or the US? All China needs to do is to keep strategically choking off critical supplies for the US economy, and there is a high likelihood of a social collapse and even a civil war. In fact, a model US themselves produced is predicting collapse and a likely civil war in the near future. https://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/model-predicting-united-states-disorder-now-points-to-civil-war/12365280
I'm also sure that China has plenty of intelligence assets within the US, likely more so than the other way around at this point.
And If you're right and the oligarchs want to live like rats and to be deposed by their own security forces in a bunker then we might have nuclear war and we'll all die. I don't really see much point speculating about that scenario.
You realize that fighting when you’re in a position of strength is a better idea right
Fighting starts when the border is crossed in both cases. But in one case, short range missiles can flatten the capital and in the other they can't. Moving to Vladivostok should thus increase strength.
Hormuz says otherwise.
At least for Israel the destruction would be bigger.
Simple, China has a state driven economy that is capable of planning decades into the future.
The US is also planning long-term. The US have backdoors in every CPU. They have browsers check every certificate and thus can take down any page if necessary. They have employed the German chancellor for years. They maintain the island chain around China for a navy blockade. They have removed the risk for platforms to be responsible for the content to get the internet started. They have prepared awareness to make people support age verification to lock it down now.
But I am not so much asking how China could do it but why the US couldn't prevent it. Rare earth only requires to build up global competition to remove China's power. Each developing country could specialize in an element and there would be enough competition. That's too much neglect for something so important.
You just have to look at these two charts here to see how fucked the US
That allows me to sleep at night. A monopoly on AI would have allowed too much control.
I think it's even the same for every field. China has created an environment for research. The US pay the price for keeping the third world down because there are not enough educated people to compete with China.
Have you considered the reverse is much more likely?
Possible but only if other countries manage the algorithms. The US know how to manage their population.
I don’t really see much point speculating about that scenario.
It could create the awareness to find other solutions.
Fighting starts when the border is crossed in both cases. But in one case, short range missiles can flatten the capital and in the other they can’t. Moving to Vladivostok should thus increase strength.
Not really, kinetic war is just an evolution of politics. The confrontation between the west and Russia started long before Russia crossed the border into Ukraine. Russia ceding territory to NATO would literally be the worst possible move on their part.
At least for Israel the destruction would be bigger.
Israel is not self sufficient, and if the US gets pushed out of the region then it will implode.
The US is also planning long-term.
If they were they wouldn't have let their industry to disappear. It's really that simple. Yes, the US has backdoors in Chips, but China is already producing their own. This was the last frontier where the US had any technological edge, and it's basically gone now. In a few years, China will be doing the same thing they've done with solar and EVs, but with chips and memory. We'll see the world switching to cheap Chinese computing once production ramps up.
They maintain the island chain around China for a navy blockade.
We already see how blockading Iran is working out. Also, go read up on the amount of ships China and US build respectively. It's eye opening.
But I am not so much asking how China could do it but why the US couldn’t prevent it.
Building this tech will take decades. Even under aggressive diversification scenarios, China is forecast to retain 78% of global refining capacity in 2040. https://www.spf.org/spf-china-observer/en/document-detail062.html
That’s too much neglect for something so important.
Hence proof that the US doesn't do any meaningful long term planning and people running things in the US do not understand how modern industry works. This was also illustrated by the attempt to cut China off from advanced chips by Biden and Trump's tariff war. In both cases, it was clear that there was complete lack of understanding of the balance of power on the American side.
Possible but only if other countries manage the algorithms. The US know how to manage their population.
Every society is three hot meals away from chaos, and the US is no exception.
It could create the awareness to find other solutions.
The only possible solution would be revolutions across the west to overthrow the tyrannical regimes, but that doesn't seem even remotely likely.
The confrontation between the west and Russia started long before Russia crossed the border into Ukraine. Russia ceding territory to NATO would literally be the worst possible move on their part.
That's why winning 100km in Ukraine isn't as useful as winning the heart of the Europeans.
Israel is not self sufficient, and if the US gets pushed out of the region then it will implode.
If. The preparation of Syria suggests that they know what they are doing.
If they were they wouldn’t have let their industry to disappear
With a regime change in China that would have been unnecessary. I think they were sure about succeeding.
We already see how blockading Iran is working out.
Inhibiting the economy can be all they wanted to get started. Also, the US is famous for doing the right thing after they did everything else first.
Also, go read up on the amount of ships China and US build respectively. It’s eye opening.
Or the amount of steel the countries produce.
Small rockets can take care of the ships, unless China manages to find counter-measures. The US expected China to get big. They will have plans to maintain the upper hand.
The only possible solution would be revolutions across the west to overthrow the tyrannical regimes, but that doesn’t seem even remotely likely.
So it should be something else. People should start thinking.
That’s why winning 100km in Ukraine isn’t as useful as winning the heart of the Europeans.
Again, I don't see how the hearts of Europeans matter when Europeans have zero say in what their regimes do. Russia managed to successfully challenge NATO and stop the expansion. NATO is falling apart as we speak because the US is now realizing this is a sunk cost for them. And Europe on its own is not a threat to Russia. Winning in Ukraine rewrites the whole geopolitical dynamic in Eurasia.
If. The preparation of Syria suggests that they know what they are doing.
The fact that they lost all their bases in the first month of the war clearly shows they have no idea what they're doing.
With a regime change in China that would have been unnecessary. I think they were sure about succeeding.
Which again supports my assertion that they have no idea what they're doing and they're not smarter than everyone else.
Inhibiting the economy can be all they wanted to get started. Also, the US is famous for doing the right thing after they did everything else first.
The US economy is in dire straits now. Meanwhile, Chinese economy is growing as a result. This is a massive strategic defeat for the US. There's no other way to spin this.
- https://www.yicaiglobal.com/news/the-proportion-of-overseas-revenue-for-chinese-a-share-listed-companies-was-nearly-17-last-year
- https://archive.ph/lQ3pf
Small rockets can take care of the ships, unless China manages to find counter-measures. The US expected China to get big. They will have plans to maintain the upper hand.
It's the US that has to worry about rockets sinking their ships. China would be fighting from their mainland. It's exactly the same problem the US has with Iran except orders of magnitude bigger power disparity. Also, China doesn't even have to fire a single rocket. As soon as the flow of treats from China stops, the US economy collapses. That's why the US was forced to abandon the tariff war.
So it should be something else. People should start thinking.
One would hope.
I don’t see how the hearts of Europeans matter
After all, it's democracies. Putin at one point mentioned that Russia can't beat American propaganda. But the West forced the conflict because they needed it. Without the conflict, how could building up the military be rationalized?
Russia managed to successfully challenge NATO and stop the expansion.
It felt like Nato was always granting so much that the forces were at a balance. I think they are using the conflict to build drone technology. Google had employees resigning because they rejected being involved in weapon technology. Defending Ukraine however is a noble cause. In a similar way, all the military requirements for a war against China can be implemented because people are ready to defend against Russia.
NATO is falling apart as we speak because the US is now realizing this is a sunk cost for them.
The US has given credit. Europe pays and gifts, Ukraine has to pay forever. Why should the US want the war to stop?
Winning in Ukraine rewrites the whole geopolitical dynamic in Eurasia.
Russia has already lost. Ukraine was on their side. How can they make Ukrainians like them again in a lifetime? The West has at least won half of Ukraine.
I think they wanted the harbor in Odessa and I think they will get it.
The fact that they lost all their bases in the first month of the war clearly shows they have no idea what they’re doing.
They lost Syria, and regrouped.
The US economy is in dire straits now. Meanwhile, Chinese economy is growing as a result. This is a massive strategic defeat for the US.
It is, but I expect the US to still be ahead of the game. Unfortunately I can't back it up so I shouldn't bore you with unfounded speculations.
After all, it’s democracies.
Democracies for the class that holds power, which is the capital owning class. None of western countries are democracies in a sense of regular people having any say in the system.
But the West forced the conflict because they needed it. Without the conflict, how could building up the military be rationalized?
Conflicts help keep the public scared and not get to uppity, but there's little sign of any meaningful military build up actually happening. Mostly, it's just slush funds and embezzlement. Remember how Europe was going to produce 1.5 mil artillery shells for Ukraine, and nothing much materialized, but lots of people lined their pockets in the process. That's been the theme with the whole conflict. Europe is getting austerity so that the kleptocrats in charge can line their pockets.
And even stuff like drone production requires Chinese components. There's really very little the west can do on its own nowadays.
The US has given credit. Europe pays and gifts, Ukraine has to pay forever. Why should the US want the war to stop?
They don't, as long as the war can be shuffled off to the Europeans and Americans can move on to threatening China. But the US has reached a limit of what it can do there materially now.
Russia has already lost. Ukraine was on their side. How can they make Ukrainians like them again in a lifetime? The West has at least won half of Ukraine.
That's not how I see it at all. Russia won because they managed to redirect their economy towards BRICS and they're finally free from the west. The Ukraine situation will resolve eventually, and Ukraine will never be a threat to Russia again. The west is just 13% of the global population. It's not the centre of the global economy anymore. The future is with the global south, and that's where Russia has realigned now.
They lost Syria, and regrouped.
I don't see any regrouping. The US continues to get pushed out of West Asia at an accelerating pace. They will leave chaos like Syria behind, but their overall position continues to deteriorate.
It is, but I expect the US to still be ahead of the game. Unfortunately I can’t back it up so I shouldn’t bore you with unfounded speculations.
I don't see how the US can possibly be ahead of the game here given that China is running circles around them.
None of western countries are democracies in a sense of regular people having any say in the system.
Because of working propaganda. But democracy is one election away.
but there’s little sign of any meaningful military build up actually happening.
So it's about making money so the elite can buy their retirement when China takes over? Possible but I don't want to believe it. Germany has overtaken the US in granade production, not all money is wasted.
And even stuff like drone production requires Chinese components.
USSR gave Nazi Germany steel and oil and the Nazis still attacked. To me, these are all arguments for nuclear war. Not being able to win conventionally but staying in the conflict doesn't make sense otherwise.
The US continues to get pushed out of West Asia
The US have everything but Yemen and Iran, and Pakistan is an ambiguous situation.
I don’t see how the US can possibly be ahead of the game here given that China is running circles around them.
I still don't have well-founded arguments. Pearl Harbor was a trap, the oil embargo before it was the trigger. I don't know the secrets of the US but I don't accept that they blundered their empire away after thinking about China for 40 years.
Because of working propaganda. But democracy is one election away.
That's not how this works. Democracy requires informed public that has means to hold those in power accountable. Neither is the case in liberal attempt at a democracy. The media space is controlled by the rich, political campaigns are funded by them, there is rampant corruption at the highest levels, and working class has no representation in the political system. You live in a class society and it has a democracy for the ruling class which is the capital owning class.
So it’s about making money so the elite can buy their retirement when China takes over?
Again, the elite will be fine. Also, nobody genuinely believes that China is going to take over. That's just racist propaganda elites use to keep the hoi polloi scared. And yes, some small things get produced, but not nearly at the volumes justified by the spending. If Europe was serious about military production then this industry would be nationalized. The fact that it's not tells you everything you need to know.
Not being able to win conventionally but staying in the conflict doesn’t make sense otherwise.
You continue to dismiss the obvious alternative of the west becoming a hermit kingdom where oligarchs will continue to enjoy every comfort. You really never explained why you think they would prefer to live in bunkers and destroy all their wealth. You made a vague claim that they would not want to have their power diminished because of China's growth. But losing everything and living in a bunker clearly would diminish their power orders of magnitude more than simply having a smaller empire to rule over.
The US have everything but Yemen and Iran, and Pakistan is an ambiguous situation.
I don't know what 'everything' is here.
I don’t know the secrets of the US but I don’t accept that they blundered their empire away after thinking about China for 40 years.
The history shows time and again that empires fall and make very stupid decisions in their waning days. I don't know why you think the US is immune to that.
You live in a class society and it has a democracy for the ruling class which is the capital owning class.
I agree. But it's one election away from being changed. So the propaganda has to be kept running. That's more difficult if Russia hasn't invaded a country.
Also, nobody genuinely believes that China is going to take over
Why not? If they set the standards where does the rent seeking come from for the West? The west will fall back to being a 'middle income country' and the elite will have some fortunes but not much global influence.
If Europe was serious about military production then this industry would be nationalized.
How can they do it without admitting that we are going to attack? Also, just allowing ministers to invest allows to keep the profits private. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KaMwc1hm-00(A journalist asks about how much shares the ministers own of Rheinmetall and none has anything to declare because it's less than 5%. But they don't say that they don't have shares.)
The fact that it’s not tells you everything you need to know.
We are not afraid because we don't fear an attack. Why produce more if we already expect air domination?
It's a good point though. It gets me wondering. However, not an issue with nuclear war.
You continue to dismiss the obvious alternative of the west becoming a hermit kingdom where oligarchs will continue to enjoy every comfort
There is no way to maintain isolation, especially if there is no full control. China can amp up their propaganda game and have their own music stars, movies and games. What has the West to offer?
You really never explained why you think they would prefer to live in bunkers and destroy all their wealth.
They maintain power over the world. Whoever has it when GAI is born and robots work can have it forever.
With robots, earth can be rebuild quickly and there is no need to stay on earth. Fly to moon and mars and leave radiation, but not the bunkers, behind. But you have bunkers with windows and sunsets.
With RNA therapies, the cancer from radiation will also be treatable.
So all together, an acceptable risk.
But losing everything and living in a bunker clearly would diminish their power orders of magnitude more than simply having a smaller empire to rule over.
Those people crave power and not fresh air, or we would never have had pollution.
The most power is important, the being at the top. They could do whatever they want. Being part of a multipolar world with international rules comes with accountability.
I don’t know what ‘everything’ is here.
All the other countries in the Middle East
The history shows time and again that empires fall and make very stupid decisions in their waning days. I don’t know why you think the US is immune to that.
It has to be stupid in hindsight not foresight. The US is unbelievably stupid, in the same way that Europeans don't understand the threat of Nato expansion to Russia. Many don't, that's why it is believable in parts, but as this comment started, the elite decides who is elected and they wouldn't select a loose cannon.
They could have integrated Russia in the 2000ies and would be able to starve China now. That level of stupidity and greed I can accept. But if China managed to escape they must have noticed and must have done something about it. It looks like they haven't done their homework. They could have risen education levels everywhere on the world and deprived China of its workforce advantage. Instead they kept waging wars. It only makes sense if they still believe that they can beat China.
I agree. But it’s one election away from being changed. So the propaganda has to be kept running. That’s more difficult if Russia hasn’t invaded a country.
But it's really not. Look at all the political parties that have a chance of forming a government, they're all capitalist parties that will keep doing more of the same. No genuine change is possible. And that's by design. The way the west operates isn't actually all too different from a one party state. It's just you have a bunch of parties that broadly share the same goals, and they rotate to create an illusion of choice for the people.
Why not? If they set the standards where does the rent seeking come from for the West? The west will fall back to being a ‘middle income country’ and the elite will have some fortunes but not much global influence.
Sure, the west will fallback and lose global influence, but nothing much changes for the elites in the west. All that means is that regular working people will just be exploited all that much harder. I mean seriously, try actually thinking for a few minutes about this. The elites have more wealth and resources than is humanly possible to spend in a thousand lifetimes. However poor the west becomes, these people will not be affected in the slightest. They will have the best food, medicine, and and everything else. They will import whatever they want. They will still have armies of staff to cater to their every whim. Literally nothing will change for them.
There is no way to maintain isolation, especially if there is no full control. China can amp up their propaganda game and have their own music stars, movies and games. What has the West to offer?
There are plenty of examples of societies that do maintain isolation, and have done so successfully for many decades. USSR managed to maintain isolation in the face of Western propaganda as well for 70s years. The west will just continue scaring people about the outside world, they will cut all outside media. They will put in identity tracking online, and there will be an official narrative that most people will subscribe to. This sort of social control isn't new or that difficult to implement.
How can they do it without admitting that we are going to attack? Also, just allowing ministers to invest allows to keep the profits private.
But that just supports my point. These people are in it to make money. They don't need to attack Russia, they just need to continue justifying austerity to line their pockets. As long as they can drum up a threat, that's all they need.
There is no way to maintain isolation, especially if there is no full control. China can amp up their propaganda game and have their own music stars, movies and games. What has the West to offer?
I disagree, and I've given you a historical example showing that you can in fact do that for a very long time.
They maintain power over the world. Whoever has it when GAI is born and robots work can have it forever.
Robots require a a sophisticated industrial base which wouldn't exist after a nuclear war.
With robots, earth can be rebuild quickly and there is no need to stay on earth. Fly to moon and mars and leave radiation, but not the bunkers, behind. But you have bunkers with windows and sunsets.
We're nowhere close to this technologically. And all these things require industry on a massive scale that is only possible during a peace time. Nuclear war would preclude this exact scenario.
With RNA therapies, the cancer from radiation will also be treatable.
Again, these treatments do not exist currently, and would not be possible to develop past nuclear war. I don't think you appreciated how connected the world economy and industry is. It is not possible to replicate this type of an economy in a bunker.
Also, as I continue to explain over and over, the oligarchs would not hold power for long. They rely on a functioning society to stay in power. Again, try actually thinking about this. Let's say you're an oligarch in a bunker. You rely on your security forces to maintain order. What do you offer your security forces that they would not have if you were deposed? You don't create anything yourself, you're just a parasite sucking up resources. The security forces will respect their leaders far more than you. And what would happen is that you'd be immediately shot and one of the security people who is respected by his subordinates would take your place. That's the reality of the bunker society.
All the other countries in the Middle East
What about them?
But if China managed to escape they must have noticed and must have done something about it.
I mean why would you expect the same people who are failing at everything they try to have the foresight to arrest China's rise? And again, what makes you think that the leadership in the west is smarter than the leadership in China. Chinese system certainly does a far better job ensuring idiots don't end up at the top. What basis is there to think that Chinese plans weren't more sophisticated than western ones? There are two players with agency in this game, and the assumption that the west would win is completely baseless.
all the political parties that have a chance of forming a government, they’re all capitalist parties
True, but without propaganda that would be different. Russia's invasion makes it easy for the West.
these people will not be affected in the slightest.
That's a hedonistic, maybe materialistic view. They lose power. They can't form the world in their image anymore. All the first class artists will create art for a different audience. They will feel that it is not their world anymore.
maintain isolation in the face of Western propaganda as well for 70s years.
The longer I think about it the more I start to see a self-isolated West. But it's much more imbalanced and thus fragile because everything is done just for the elite.
But that just supports my point. These people are in it to make money.
It kind of does but I think others make the plans. Now the elite runs the country and owns the companies. If they are nationalized the elite would lose direct control over the companies and wouldn't have leverage to make politicians do what they want.
justifying austerity to line their pockets.
Doesn't austerity mean frugality? They line their pockets by having the Russian threat. With less austerity they could borrow more money and line even more.
Robots require a a sophisticated industrial base which wouldn’t exist after a nuclear war.
That's why the robots have to be stored in bunkers, not humans.
But they don't need the full industry. All they need are microfiches with the blueprints and the education. Billions of humans will survive. They can restart the economy step by step.
They rely on a functioning society to stay in power.
How will the world look after a nuclear war? A molten surface and life only exists in bunkers?
I think life will go on, like Chernobyl. Billionaires will stay in bunkers for the 10 hours of war and afterwards to preserve their bodies. But for everybody else society will continue. The billionaires will be able to protect each other with their independent security services.
All the other countries in the Middle East
What about them?
The US have a grip on them. I don't see the US leaving.
I mean why would you expect the same people who are failing at everything they try to have the foresight to arrest China’s rise?
I don't see them failing. E.g. Vietnam war introduced fiat currency.
There are two players with agency in this game, and the assumption that the west would win is completely baseless.
The West has taken out every empire, from old China to USSR. The track record is impressive. We are in a time of information wars. Appearing to fail is a tactic. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madman_theory
Trump is not an idiot at the top. His Russian mafia contacts, do they link to Putin and not to the people who took down the USSR? I think he is one of the most trusted persons in the US elite and he is there because the US play a very difficult strategy of deception.
China can win, but everything must have been stacked against them from the start. So I expect that the US has some jokers left.
True, but without propaganda that would be different. Russia’s invasion makes it easy for the West.
You wouldn't be living under liberal capitalism if rich didn't own all the means of propaganda. And it's not like anything changed after the war started in that regard.
That's a hedonistic, maybe materialistic view. They lose power.
As I already said, in a case of a nuclear holocaust they lose orders of magnitude more power. And as I keep pointing out, they would quickly find themselves superfluous in a bunker society.
The longer I think about it the more I start to see a self-isolated West. But it’s much more imbalanced and thus fragile because everything is done just for the elite.
Right, and the rich are planning exactly for this scenario https://elpidio.org/2018/02/12/citigroups-plutonomy-memo-there-are-rich-consumers-and-there-are-the-rest/
Now the elite runs the country and owns the companies. If they are nationalized the elite would lose direct control over the companies and wouldn’t have leverage to make politicians do what they want.
That's part of the reason why industry was outsourced incidentally. Can't have workers organizing and unionizing, or your assets getting nationalized if you move them to the colonies.
Doesn’t austerity mean frugality? They line their pockets by having the Russian threat. With less austerity they could borrow more money and line even more.
It will mean destroying the social safety net to funnel money to the military. It's going to mean worse infrastructure, less social services, longer time till retirement. Basically what you see in the US today. Europe was allowed to have a strong social safety net during the Cold War because you had USSR next door acting as a threat of a good example.
That’s why the robots have to be stored in bunkers, not humans.
Modern robots aren't self sufficient. These aren't Star Wars droids. They can do a very limited set of tasks slowly, and they need humans to repair and maintain them. The technology you're talking about does not exist.
But they don’t need the full industry. All they need are microfiches with the blueprints and the education. Billions of humans will survive. They can restart the economy step by step.
You still haven't addressed my question of how they themselves survive in a bunker society. They would have no power and no purpose. What will stop the head of their private army from shooting the oligarch and taking their place?
I think life will go on, like Chernobyl. Billionaires will stay in bunkers for the 10 hours of war and afterwards to preserve their bodies. But for everybody else society will continue. The billionaires will be able to protect each other with their independent security services.
That's not how it will work at all. There will be massive fallout all over the world. That means radiation and cancer for those on the surface. Chernobyl is still not safe for humans. On top of that, we'd be looking at a nuclear winter where there would be mass crop failures. The whole current society would collapse. So, if they miraculously survived in their bunkers, they'd be entering a Mad Max world where, once again, they have no power.
I can't stress this point enough. Their entire status is a social contract. They have no inherent power. We all just socially agreed to allow them to have the resources and wealth they have. Once that contract is broken there's no going back. Nobody will allow the people who destroyed the world to just go back to business as usual.
The US have a grip on them. I don’t see the US leaving.
What value do they provide? The US bases are all destroyed now. They took decades to build and countless billions, possibly trillions at current prices. That infrastructure isn't coming back. So, all the staging areas these states provided is now useless. They themselves have one dimensional economies centred on energy exports. They don't have any industry to contribute, they don't have large armies to fight Iran with. So, they're not really playing any significant role that I can see.
I don’t see them failing. E.g. Vietnam war introduced fiat currency.
I see them failing all the time. Introducing fiat currency doesn't negate that they lost in Iran, just as they lost in Afghanistan, and they even failed to gain control of Iraq even after initially toppling the government. Strategically these are all failures. And now, the whole petrodollar scheme is coming apart because Iran demands trade in yuan. Meanwhile, Chinese renewable exports are going through the roof. They also failed in Russia with the war creating a whole alternative trading system that no longer requires the dollar or SWIFT. Now countries can trade completely outside western control. So, yes the empire has been failing in a massive way.
The West has taken out every empire, from old China to USSR.
The west did not take out USSR, that's a common misconception in the west due to western propaganda. It dissolved due to its own internal contradictions, and it was not a result of western actions. The reason we are in the mess we are in today is precisely because the west views the dissolution of USSR as a victory.
Trump is not an idiot at the top. His Russian mafia contacts, do they link to Putin and not to the people who took down the USSR? I think he is one of the most trusted persons in the US elite and he is there because the US play a very difficult strategy of deception.
I don't think it's even close to being that deep. Trump is an opportunist through and through, and he's the equivalent of Yeltsin in post Soviet Russia, where him and his clique are robbing the country blind.
China can win, but everything must have been stacked against them from the start. So I expect that the US has some jokers left.
I don't see what the US has left because they don't have the people, or the science, or the industry to compete with China. Materially, China has already won on every front that matters.
It will mean destroying the social safety net to funnel money to the military.
With that, calling it austerity make sense.
It seems, together with the city group text, that they are nurturing their billionaires to have an agile elite that can take on China.
Why would China not choke them like the third world has been choked if the West needs Chinese products? It starts to become plausible that the West may aim for that despite the risk but I still cannot imagine the West being able to maintain their isolation.
Chernobyl is still not safe for humans.
Haven't said that. Life on earth will become difficult.
So, if they miraculously survived in their bunkers, they’d be entering a Mad Max world where, once again, they have no power.
Why shouldn't their henchmen maintain control? If they have the food they set the rules. It's people on a ship. Most don't lynch their captain.
I can’t stress this point enough. Their entire status is a social contract.
It's fragile, but people also just have to move to Lemmy to have a free internet.
They manage identities. They are not bound by the usual material limits. People stick to their roles.
lost in Afghanistan
Didn't they gain control over huge parts of Iran's water supply?
Whatever was planned about the drug pandemic, Afghanistan helped. It's possible to speculate about more benefits. Wealth transger was also a win, as well as realistic training grounds.
gain control of Iraq
They got Al Nusra in Syria. That's a win. Why would they need Iraq itself?
And now, the whole petrodollar scheme is coming apart because Iran demands trade in yuan.
Possible. But if they can get Iran aligned they will control it more than ever.
They don’t have any industry to contribute, they don’t have large armies to fight Iran with.
The Saudi air force?
So, yes the empire has been failing in a massive way.
Still agree. But I can't judge which losses were substantial and which ones just look severe.
[USSR] dissolved due to its own internal contradictions
Not the need for wheat imports and falling oil prices?
he’s the equivalent of Yeltsin in post Soviet Russia
Trump had a deeply politically connected mentor who not only taught him to sue everybody . He is not just a real estate heir.
I don’t see what the US has left because they don’t have the people, or the science, or the industry to compete with China. Materially, China has already won on every front that matters.
Neither do I, apart from nuclear war. But they have been shifting money to the elite for some time. Attacking Iran for some weeks and then fold can't be all they have.
Why would China not choke them like the third world has been choked if the West needs Chinese products?
Look at what happened when the US tried to choke China off from chips. It's better to keep the west dependent than to burn bridges, that's how you exercise influence in the long term. Chinese policy ensures that a lot of elites are invested in having peaceful relations.
Why shouldn’t their henchmen maintain control? If they have the food they set the rules. It’s people on a ship. Most don’t lynch their captain.
Why would their henchmen need the oligarchs? There is nothing the oligarchs add to the equation. The captain of a ship has an actual function in keeping the ship running. The oligarch does not. The head of the henchmen can do everything the oligarch can, so why would they not take over?
Didn’t they gain control over huge parts of Iran’s water supply?
Where?
Whatever was planned about the drug pandemic, Afghanistan helped. It’s possible to speculate about more benefits. Wealth transger was also a win, as well as realistic training grounds.
The point of Afghanistan was to create instability that would get in the way of BRI connecting China to West Asia. Now that the US has been kicked out, the trade is resuming. So, this is a huge loss for the empire.
They got Al Nusra in Syria. That’s a win. Why would they need Iraq itself?
What did they get in Syria exactly, please do explain. Last I looked, Syria is now dysfunctional, and it still hosts Russian bases. I do not see what it actually affords. Syria was never a strong player one way or the other.
Possible. But if they can get Iran aligned they will control it more than ever.
That's very obviously not going to happen. So let's stick to the real world here.
The Saudi air force?
That's the US air force which Iran has been successfully bombing. Saudis don't produce anything themselves.
Still agree. But I can’t judge which losses were substantial and which ones just look severe.
We can tell by looking at the map. The US is slowly being squeezed out of Africa,West Asia, and Ukraine. All of that means loss of resources and influence around the world.
Not the need for wheat imports and falling oil prices?
The Soviet economy was doing a lot better than pretty much any western economy is doing now at the time. USSR also was a major exporter of wheat. The real economic problems started after Gorbachev's reforms and market liberalization. I lived through it, so I remember this well.
Trump had a deeply politically connected mentor who not only taught him to sue everybody . He is not just a real estate heir.
That's not my point. I'm saying Trump is a kleptocrat and his clique is robbing the country blind. They don't care about any long term vision. This is precisely what we saw in post Soviet years.
Neither do I, apart from nuclear war. But they have been shifting money to the elite for some time. Attacking Iran for some weeks and then fold can’t be all they have.
I guess we'll see soon enough. But I don't believe in magic myself.
The captain of a ship has an actual function in keeping the ship running. The oligarch does not.
All the connections to keep businesses running, the oligarchs make decisions and connections.
Where?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan%E2%80%93Iran_water_dispute
What did they get in Syria exactly
Syria's rationale for rejecting the Qatar proposal was said to be "to protect the interests of [its] Russian ally, which is Europe's top supplier of natural gas."[
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Iraq%E2%80%93Syria_pipeline
We can tell by looking at the map. The US is slowly being squeezed out of
Africa,
Sudan, Ruanda/Congo, it's back and forth
West Asia,
We will see.
and Ukraine.
If Russia doesn't conquer everything it's a win for the West.
USSR also was a major exporter of wheat.
In the 1980s, the Soviet Union needed considerable sums of hard currency to pay for food and capital goods imports and to support client states. What the country could not earn from exports or gold sales it borrowed through its banks in London, Frankfurt, Vienna, Paris, and Luxembourg. Large grain imports pushed the Soviet debt quite high in 1981.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_trade_of_the_Soviet_Union
This is precisely what we saw in post Soviet years.
I would assume that cleptocrats in USSR were there to dismantle the USSR. Why should the US elite dismantle their own country? Almost everything is already theirs.
looks like we reached the max thread depth here 🤣
There are not places for millions or billions of people. Most will live outside. So a bunker is more like a mansion than an island.
People who survive in the hell outside aren't going to be receptive towards the rats in the bunker. Also, the old society would be gone. Food shortages from failing crops during the nuclear winter will make sure of that. So, if your oligarch somehow survives the bunker years, they will becoming out into a whole new society where they have no power.
I have no proof, no hint, but Iran seems to be the goal of 7 countries in 5 years
The fact that Iran is on the target list is well known, but it's not clear to me that the droughts were manufactured. The fact that they do have huge rainfalls now, likely indicates that it was a natural pattern.
The pipeline can be used because Syria was overrun.
My point was that the pipeline would go to Turkey and Europe, it's unlikely these will be the customers for Iran going forward. Caspian sea seems far more relevant, and that's where Russia and Iran have control.
Of that I am not sure.
They have been pulling resources out of Africa, and now there's a Sahel alliance that's pivoting towards Russia. So, this is a pretty big setback for the US. We do see trouble starting up in Mali now, so the empire is hitting back here, we'll see how that develops. The problem for the US is that they have to be everywhere at once. They have to project power in Latin America, and in Asia, and in Africa, and in West Asia, and in Europe. Meanwhile, their adversaries only need to project power in their own region. So it's the US against the global majority here. The math does not work in the US favor.
Add to that the possibility for a second connection between Red Sea and Mediterranean and the east of Ukraine becomes even more valuable.
Central Ukraine will almost certainly fall under Russian control.
Europe will likely build a new economic region in Poland. Unlike e.g. the German industrial regions its mostly flat so perfect for unlimited growth.
But the more important point What happens to Europe economically when Europe has to pour billions into propping up a rump Ukraine or deal with millions more refugees. Given the current economic situation in Europe and the rising energy prices, this seems like a very bad scenario. Growth requires energy to build factories and manufacture things. That's precisely what Europe lacks.
How does it compensate
Compensate for what, it say plainly that trade played a tiny part in USSR economy overall.
Why else has the USSR folded, what were the internal struggles?
The internal struggles were entirely political. There was a faction that wanted to restore capitalism, and Yeltsin realized that he'd rather be a president of Russia than a Soviet premier which gave him more power. The break up of USSR was an internal power grab by people who should've been shot for treason.
With their untradable currency the 4% means that the USSR didn’t have a big trade surplus to pay their dept.
USSR could've just defaulted on the debt and moved on. Again, trade wasn't a big part of the economy and that means defaulting would have had pretty much no effect on it.
I believe the transfer part but I also believe that they are clever enough to not crush the country with it.
I fail to see what you base the second part on. All the available evidence for the past decade clearly indicates an empire in decline.
Continuation: https://feddit.org/post/29297575/12818091
All the connections to keep businesses running, the oligarchs make decisions and connections.
What connections? We're talking about people living in a bunker. This isn't a sophisticated society. Anybody who can operate a military unit can run it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan%E2%80%93Iran_water_dispute
You'll have to elaborate here. Yes, they have a dispute, but neither Iran or Afghanistan are run by the US. Nor is this an existential problem for Iran. Seems like a completely tangential issue.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Iraq%E2%80%93Syria_pipeline
It's unlikely the pipeline could get much use at this point even if Syria wasn't overrun. Look at where it's going.
Sudan, Ruanda/Congo, it’s back and forth
But overall US influence is getting smaller over time and the process is self reinforcing.
If Russia doesn’t conquer everything it’s a win for the West.
Not really. What's most likely is that Russia will integrate friendly and neutral regions, while the rest will become Europe's problem. Western regions of Ukraine aren't economically productive with most of the farmland and resources being in the east. So, Europe will be stuck dealing with a rump state that's not self sufficient. The choice will be to either pour billions into it to keep it stabilized which will necessitate further austerity and drive further public unrest, or to let it fall and deal with a refugee crisis. Either way, Europe will be screwed economically as a result. That's not a win for the west by any stretch of imagination.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_trade_of_the_Soviet_Union
First sentence from your link: Soviet foreign trade played only a minor role in the Soviet economy. In 1985, for example, exports and imports each accounted for only 4 percent of the Soviet gross national product.
I would assume that cleptocrats in USSR were there to dismantle the USSR. Why should the US elite dismantle their own country? Almost everything is already theirs.
The kleptocrats in the US will dismantle their country to transfer the wealth from the working masses to themselves. That's where their wealth comes from.
What connections? We’re talking about people living in a bunker.
There are not places for millions or billions of people. Most will live outside. So a bunker is more like a mansion than an island.
Nor is this an existential problem for Iran.
Iran was considering to move their capital. Coincidentally it started raining when the war started, but the drought seems to be severe. I have no proof, no hint, but Iran seems to be the goal of 7 countries in 5 years, so I can imagine that cutting water to Iran was a secret part of the Afghanistan objectives. Seems like they finished the dam after 40 years just recently. That's suspicious.
It’s unlikely the pipeline could get much use at this point even if Syria wasn’t overrun.
The pipeline can be used because Syria was overrun. But the point is that Syria was from the start important. Like they got the oil out of Syria during the war they can get the pipeline running under the protection of the new rulers. I don't think Russia can rise an insurgency there, especially if they want to keep their bases.
But overall US influence is getting smaller over time and the process is self reinforcing.
Of that I am not sure. I think the US still seems to fight for hegemony, or as you say isolation, and unless they have gone crazy they must believe that it is possible when they do it. Who am I to be sure about their loss?
So, Europe will be stuck dealing with a rump state that’s not self sufficient.
And a port in Odessa. With https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istanbul_Canaland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterway_E40the east becomes valuable.
Add to that the possibility for a second connection between Red Sea and Mediterranean and the east of Ukraine becomes even more valuable.
Either way, Europe will be screwed economically as a result.
Europe will likely build a new economic region in Poland. Unlike e.g. the German industrial regions its mostly flat so perfect for unlimited growth.
In 1985, for example, exports and imports each accounted for only 4 percent of the Soviet gross national product.
How does it compensate
it borrowed through its banks in London, Frankfurt, Vienna, Paris, and Luxembourg. Large grain imports pushed the Soviet debt quite high in 1981.
USSR had dept and Saudi Arabia flooded the market until the prices were so low that the USSR got into trouble. Why else has the USSR folded, what were the internal struggles?
With their untradable currency the 4% means that the USSR didn't have a big trade surplus to pay their dept.
The kleptocrats in the US will dismantle their country to transfer the wealth from the working masses to themselves.
I believe the transfer part but I also believe that they are clever enough to not crush the country with it.
... Continuation: https://feddit.org/post/29297575/12938038
looks like we reached the max thread depth here 🤣
People who survive in the hell outside aren’t going to be receptive towards the rats in the bunker.
Unless they have family who needs cancer medicine. Structuring society is the core competence of the elite. The technology race with China is the difficult part.
The fact that they do have huge rainfalls now, likely indicates that it was a natural pattern.
Yes, it's just fate like the Tsunami for Japan. With that water Iran has a much easier war to fight. They tried to buy water before but the other countries declined. I think I got it from here: https://feddit.org/post/21869942but I won't watch it to verify.
but it’s not clear to me that the droughts were manufactured.
By not selling the water. Of course there is also the manufactured weather part but that's a topic better not to touch in serious.
it’s unlikely these will be the customers for Iran going forward.
My mistake. There is also a project for Qatar. I forgot to link after having seen the relevant quote on the linked page.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar%E2%80%93Turkey_pipeline
The problem for the US is that they have to be everywhere at once. ... The math does not work in the US favor.
It's GDR and Stasi again. The US must use so many intelligent people for spying that they have none for their economy. AI is their only way out.
Central Ukraine will almost certainly fall under Russian control.
Russia was happy with the new republics in the original peace treaty. I can't imagine that they will waste much more lives than making their point. Having the Dnieper as a border would be nice but it would mean having to conquer Kyiv. Even then, the Dnieper is the border and Europe would have free shipping. I think we are preparing for 2029 to be able to intervene should Russia try to cross the Dnieper.
... with millions more refugees. Given the current economic situation in Europe and the rising energy prices, this seems like a very bad scenario.
Free workers, gas from Qatar and a decoupling from China so everything has to be produced locally. That's a perfect alignment.
The break up of USSR was an internal power grab by people who should’ve been shot for treason.
But why weren't they? Were the harvest problems resolved? I should read that part of history on my own though. The way Gorbatchev was treated afterwards by the West has always left me suspicious that they had an even bigger influence.
Again, trade wasn’t a big part of the economy and that means defaulting would have had pretty much no effect on it.
Unless they wanted to open up to the global economy and needed a reputation to receive credits.
clever enough to not crush the country
I fail to see what you base the second part on.
E.g. Trump himself. I think it's a conscious decision to adapt to an age of information wars. It's the opposite of the Chinese 5 year plan predictability. People don't expect morality anymore or a coherent narrative. They are free to do whatever is necessary to maintain their power.
Or the Ukraine war. It's impressive that historic facts don't count and are ignored in arguments. To pull this off and maintain control, that's impressive.
Unless they have family who needs cancer medicine. Structuring society is the core competence of the elite. The technology race with China is the difficult part.
It really isn't. This is just the mythology they've built up around themselves. They're in no way necessary. Out of millions of people, there are plenty of competent organizers out there who would quickly step up.
By not selling the water. Of course there is also the manufactured weather part but that’s a topic better not to touch in serious.
I'm still skeptical there's a long term structural problem here in the first place. The water situation seems to be far more precarious in the Gulf states which rely on desalination for something like 90% of their water. So, if the conflict does escalate, the problems will be on the US aligned side if Iran decides to bomb that infrastructure.
It’s GDR and Stasi again. The US must use so many intelligent people for spying that they have none for their economy. AI is their only way out.
AI really isn't a way out because you still need people to validate what AI outputs, and spying isn't the only issue. It's lack of force projection capacity. The US does not have the industry needed to rule over the whole world. That's the elephant in the room. This is why I keep explaining that it's the material conditions that matter the most. You need tanks, and jets, and trucks, and ammunition, and food, and all of that has to be delivered across the globe to prop up your bases and soldiers stationed there. That's an incredible drain on the resources.
Russia was happy with the new republics in the original peace treaty. I can’t imagine that they will waste much more lives than making their point.
I don't think that's how it will play out. If you look at the end of WW2, what happened was that German fighting capacity collapsed, and then the Soviets were in Berlin within months. I expect the same thing will happen in Ukraine. Once the army collapses through attrition, Russia will simply dictate terms. They're not going to be fighting for every centimetre of Ukraine. They will hold referendums, and a lot of oblasts will join Russia as a result. If you look at the demographics, it's pretty easy to see how this will play out in the end.
The slides from this lecture that Mearsheimer gave back in 2015 are a good overview:
here's how the election in 2004 went:
this is the 2010 election:
I expect, that's where the split will lie in the end.
Free workers, gas from Qatar and a decoupling from China so everything has to be produced locally. That’s a perfect alignment.
Last I looked, Qatar isn't exporting much of anything right now, and the infrastructure is going to take at least half a decade to rebuild. Also, Qatar isn't nearly sufficient to fuel all of Europe even when it was operating at peak capacity.
But why weren’t they? Were the harvest problems resolved? I should read that part of history on my own though. The way Gorbatchev was treated afterwards by the West has always left me suspicious that they had an even bigger influence.
There never were any food shortages until after the dissolution. I can tell you that from personal experience. Gorbachev was a traitor and should've been shot.
Unless they wanted to open up to the global economy and needed a reputation to receive credits.
But if they already had a self sufficient economy, that clearly wouldn't be a reason for economic collapse given the existing state of things. It might've precluded some future expansion, but it wouldn't have been the major driver of internal economic problems within the system as it was.
E.g. Trump himself. I think it’s a conscious decision to adapt to an age of information wars.
It's not just Trump. It's the whole apparatus that's failing, and the problems were the same under Biden. Also, the rule of empires is that the oligarchs always focus on infighting during the waning days of the empire. And we're seeing this in the US as well. It is not a homogeneous force with everyone pulling in the same direction. There are factions within the US that are now fighting each other.
Or the Ukraine war. It’s impressive that historic facts don’t count and are ignored in arguments. To pull this off and maintain control, that’s impressive.
Ukraine will be taught in history schools as the turning point which collapsed the empire. It was the pivotal moment where the limits of US economic power were exposed. Russia prevailed in the initial sanctions assault and major powers like China and India refused to join on the sanctions. This directly led to the formation of a parallel economic system that the US has no control over. Much of the world trade no longer goes through SWIFT, and it is completely opaque to the West. And once this was ironed out with Russia it's increasingly being expanded across BRICS and nations that trade with them. This makes sanctions largely ineffective, and it directly set the stage for what we see now with Iran demanding oil is traded in yuan. Without the transaction system in place, that would've been impossible. Thus, the US lost its biggest leverage over the world by provoking a war in Ukraine.
They’re in no way necessary.
No doubt. But their skill is to make themselves necessary.
problems will be on the US aligned side
They will. The water control was just a possible reason why the US could have been successful in Afghanistan despite losing the war.
The US does not have the industry needed to rule over the whole world.
Why not? They have Blackrock and own many shares all over the world and the CEOs come to their conference in Davos.
Once the army collapses through attrition, Russia will simply dictate terms. They’re not going to be fighting for every
Crossing the Dnieper can't be easy and thus should be sufficiently easy to defend. Before the front collapses, Ukraine will fall back to that line.
For raw man power, Europe will send reinforcements to protect E40.
If the war lasts longer then whoever has autonomous drones ready first will win.
I expect, that’s where the split will lie in the end.
It could be, but E40 is too valuable and requires the western part up to Kherson.
It would turn Poland into an industrial powerhouse. Thus they should be motivated enough to defend the Dnieper on their own if Ukraine lost their manpower.
Qatar isn’t nearly sufficient to fuel all of Europe
It just has to be enough to guarantee that Europe is a buyers market. Iran and Russia and all the other countries can be allowed to sell, too.
There never were any food shortages until after the dissolution.
Because they imported.
But if they already had a self sufficient economy
They hadn't. They needed wheat which means, given the available farm land and oil, they needed fertilizers and machines. Why else would the USSR of all places need to import grain? They also couldn't catch up with digital technology. The GDR was aware and invested 1980ies billions but did not succeed.
It’s not just Trump. It’s the whole apparatus that’s failing
If Trump is for real then they are failing for real. But then, why is nobody organising an impeachment? So Trump is deception and no matter the infighting, they stand behind whatever the goal is.
Thus, the US lost its biggest leverage over the world by provoking a war in Ukraine.
True, but with the rise of China it couldn't last for much longer. It's not rocket science and China has the size to guarantee its stability.
The US would have definitely lost their empire if they had done nothing. Losing SWIFT is colateral damage. For Ukraine Russia left Syria then Iran could be bombed. But more importantly, Germany is split from Russia. This makes US isolation much easier.
I still think that they want to turn Russia so that they can isolate China. Why else maintain the island chain? But it looks impossible.
No doubt. But their skill is to make themselves necessary.
Yet, revolutions happen and oligarchs get deposed. Causing a nuclear holocaust would certainly be a good trigger for such an event.
Why not? They have Blackrock and own many shares all over the world and the CEOs come to their conference in Davos.
Just look at industrial production numbers and it all becomes clear. For example, the US produces about as much steel as Russia does. China produces an order of magnitude more. It's pretty clear that the US does not have industrial capacity to run a global empire.
Crossing the Dnieper can’t be easy and thus should be sufficiently easy to defend. Before the front collapses, Ukraine will fall back to that line.
We'll see, but these things aren't linear. It's not going to be just a gradual and controlled attrition. At some point you end up with a phase change and collapse happens all at once. Europe isn't going to be able to prevent that.
It would turn Poland into an industrial powerhouse. Thus they should be motivated enough to defend the Dnieper on their own if Ukraine lost their manpower.
Again, the elephant in the room is the lack of cheap energy.
It just has to be enough to guarantee that Europe is a buyers market. Iran and Russia and all the other countries can be allowed to sell, too.
But it's not, it's only around 15% last I looked.
Because they imported.
Yes they did, but largely from friendly countries.
They hadn’t. They needed wheat which means, given the available farm land and oil, they needed fertilizers and machines. Why else would the USSR of all places need to import grain? They also couldn’t catch up with digital technology. The GDR was aware and invested 1980ies billions but did not succeed.
Some of it was mismanagement, and it would've been possible to reorient production to increase yields as Russia is doing today.
True, but with the rise of China it couldn’t last for much longer. It’s not rocket science and China has the size to guarantee its stability.
Timing does matter though because it precluded US plans against China. Now we're in a different world, and choking China economically is impossible. Trump's tariff war proved that. If the war in Ukraine didn't happen, things would've played out very differently due to SWIFT being the central trading system.
I still think that they want to turn Russia so that they can isolate China. Why else maintain the island chain? But it looks impossible.
Oh that was absolutely the plan. They didn't even hide it. https://nationalinterest.org/feature/case-american-led-peace-ukraine-206732
But plans don't always work out the way you expect. And the strategy was a failure pushing Russia and China closer together.
Causing a nuclear holocaust would certainly be a good trigger for such an event
With propaganda people will believe that the Russians started it.
It’s pretty clear that the US does not have industrial capacity to run a global empire.
They just have to own it or make sure that there is competition and prices are low. Steel from India is as good as Steel from Pittsburg.
Europe isn’t going to be able to prevent that.
They can take over parts of the front.
Qatar gas ... But it’s not, it’s only around 15% last I looked.
300 billion m3 per year https://ieefa.org/eu-gas-flows-tracker
vs
160 billion m3 per year https://geographic.org/stats/qatar/qatar_natural_gas_production_time_series.html
That should be enough to make EU industries competitive again. With that option, Russian gas stops being a dependency and can be allowed, too, as well as gas from Iran and the new gas from Israel.
Some of it was mismanagement, and it would’ve been possible to reorient production to increase yields as Russia is doing today.
Your argument for Swift, timing.
If the war in Ukraine didn’t happen, things would’ve played out very differently due to SWIFT being the central trading system.
How? China's products can only be replaced gradually. That gives China time to establish it.
And the strategy was a failure pushing Russia and China closer together.
They made that choice when they didn't accept Russia into Nato. Regime change in Russia is a 'nice to have' but they must have plans to contain them together. They could have asked Russia to split into regions up to the 00ies and then join the EU on equal terms while China could be isolated for being communist. Market economy for China had done its duty when the USSR collapsed.
A side note:
I think most productivity gains come from outsourcing work to China which just means lower wages. Having to do them by ourselves, we will fall back to 90ies productivity. The decoupling will be tough.
With propaganda people will believe that the Russians started it.
You seem to think these people are all powerful and have some supernatural powers. They're just rich assholes, and they're not special. You really need to understand that the oligarchs are just regular fucking people who derive all their privilege from the fact they were born lucky. That's it.
They just have to own it or make sure that there is competition and prices are low. Steel from India is as good as Steel from Pittsburg.
India doesn't have the industrial capacity to produce steel either. They decided to go straight into financialization of their economy skipping the critical step. The problem the west has right now is that China is the key industrial power in the world. There's no path to changing that in the foreseeable future, certainly not before the US collapses.
They can take over parts of the front.
I'm sure that's gonna play great with the public. Last I looked, the governments in Europe are already scraping rock bottom in terms of popularity. Europe might have literal revolutions if they try to have a direct war with Russia.
That should be enough to make EU industries competitive again. With that option, Russian gas stops being a dependency and can be allowed, too, as well as gas from Iran and the new gas from Israel.
It's not. During the winter of 2025–2026, approximately 7% of Europe’s LNG imports came from Qatar. That's nowhere near enough. https://fsr.eui.eu/how-the-war-with-iran-is-reshaping-europes-gas-security/
How? China’s products can only be replaced gradually. That gives China time to establish it.
If the US slapped tariffs on China when China could only use SWIFT for settlements, then China would've had to eat the tariff or just stop all their exports while they figured out a new system. That would've had a significant impact on their own economy. They could hurt US back, but their own economy would suffer too. Having a readily available alternative gave China an incredible amount leverage.
And yes, the west absolutely could have absorbed Russia after USSR fell. Turning Russia into an adversary was another huge strategic blunder for the empire.
I think most productivity gains come from outsourcing work to China which just means lower wages.
That hasn't been true for a while actually. The reason China is so far ahead in cost of production is mass automation and vertical supply chains. China has an incredible density of industry meaning that you have very tight and efficient logistics where all the components can often be produced in the same province or even the same city. Nothing like this exists anywhere else in the world.
You seem to think these people are all powerful and have some supernatural powers.
So do you ;)
You wouldn’t be living under liberal capitalism if rich didn’t own all the means of propaganda.
They are regular people though.
the governments in Europe are already scraping rock bottom in terms of popularity.
And yet people will be ready to fight Russia. At least in Germany the AfD won't reach 50%, so no anti war party in sight.
The problem the west has right now is that China is the key industrial power in the world. There’s no path to changing that in the foreseeable future, certainly not before the US collapses.
True, but the US and Europe may try funny things.
It’s not. During the winter of 2025–2026, approximately 7%
The pipeline doesn't exist yet. But if it does, 50% would be possible, irrespective of current deliveries.
No, I don't. My whole point is that they're not special, they don't have any crystal ball, and they're not playing 4d chess. They're just managers of an empire in decline.
They are regular people though.
They are regular people who were lucky enough to be born into unimaginable wealth which they use to maintain their position of power. Please don't remove essential context when quoting me.
And yet people will be ready to fight Russia. At least in Germany the AfD won’t reach 50%, so no anti war party in sight.
I guess we'll see what happens. I don't think AfD needs to reach 50% in Germany. The country could just descend into political and social unrest. It's all fun and games when Ukrainians are getting shoved into vans to go die on the front, it's going to hit different when it happens in western countries.
True, but the US and Europe may try funny things.
I mean they've been trying funny things for decades now. We are where we are today precisely as a result of that.
The pipeline doesn’t exist yet. But if it does, 50% would be possible, irrespective of current deliveries.
It's the production capacity that's missing. Iran bombed the infrastructure that extracts natural gas, and it's going to be years before it's back online even if the war stopped tomorrow, which it won't.
They are regular people who were lucky enough to be born into unimaginable wealth which they use to maintain their position of power.
Point taken.
and it’s going to be years before it’s back online even if the war stopped tomorrow, which it won’t.
The canals and pipelines haven't been built yet. For now America wants to sell its fracking gas.
I think we have discussed every aspect of the war. Thanks for your insights and this conversation.
likewise, we'll just have to wait and see how it all plays out now
To me nuclear war is a reality. Waiting is an option but if somebody has an idea for preventing it I may do more than waiting.
It is certainly a possible outcome from the current state of things, but I don't think it's inevitable or even the most likely outcome. The only thing people in the west can do is to challenge their regimes. Back during the cold war, Europe had mass protests against nuclear weapons because people understood what a threat they were. Today, there's no serious discussion of the topic.
Back during the cold war, Europe had mass protests against nuclear weapons because people understood what a threat they were.
Judging by the way people are stuck with Reddit I believe that people cannot organise on their own. As a consequence I believe that all big political protests are organised by state actors.
In this case, GDR and USSR may have supported the students to organise in West Germany.
The West has learned and nowadays the infrastructure to organise protests is missing. This time we gladly hope that the US install their rockets in Germany.
I agree, I think the big question is going to be is how much of a drop in living standards people will be willing to swallow. Every state is ultimately a social contract, and the legitimacy of the state depends on people believing that the contract is fundamentally fair. I'd argue we're already seeing a collapse of faith in the system in the west, and that's precisely why there is now push to ban media, do things like chat control and age verification. People are starting to speak out against the system and the ruling class feels vulnerable. The more they push their own people off the cliff the more opposition to the state will grow.