Yeah, we have an uphill battle. The rare earth metals case is an easy example. They allow zero regulation, cheap, environmentally harmful extraction practices for rare earth metals. We broke the sole site in the US that can harvest some of these rare earth metals because it was a turtle habitat. The US Gov should've stepped in, taken over the mine for military purposes, then done the needful. Instead the private industry trying to fetch the resources couldn't afford to. They've tried twice, and both times it has been too expensive... and now China has cornered the market on extraction AND production.
Welcome to our community
Be apart of something great, join today!
Why is China saying this at this very moment?
- Thread starter DougDaBroadcasta
- Start date
- Replies: 70
- Views: 942
- Politics
HintonJamesHeel
Esteemed Member
- Messages
- 608
If we know anything in this country, a leader tweeting shit out is meaningless.
China has:
Currently a struggling economy
Huge reliance on imports
Terrible consumer confidence
Basically no diversity
Aging population
Declining birthrate
None of that takes into account the cost and overhead of being communist and suppressing thought and individualism.
China is not a threat. It used to be but no longer.
China has:
Currently a struggling economy
Huge reliance on imports
Terrible consumer confidence
Basically no diversity
Aging population
Declining birthrate
None of that takes into account the cost and overhead of being communist and suppressing thought and individualism.
China is not a threat. It used to be but no longer.
Mulberry Heel
Iconic Member
- Messages
- 2,263
Yes, but we didn't have Donald Trump and his Cult of Personality in total control of the government then either. Electing Trump was like shooting yourself in both feet while investing all of your money in Trump Steaks and MyPillow.
Mulberry Heel
Iconic Member
- Messages
- 2,263
And our current government is waging a war on diversity and trying to eliminate it, and the only thing keeping us from having a declining, aging population and declining birthrate are (surprise!) immigrants, which Trump 2.0 wants to drive out of the country. The very things America needs to keep us at the top are the very things that Trumpers want to abolish and remove - our diversity and immigrants. Go figure.
Paine
Iconic Member
- Messages
- 2,058
Calling China “not a threat” because it’s communist and lacks diversity is unserious. China’s not some ideological cartoon; it’s the world’s second-largest economy, a technological competitor, and a rising military power. They don’t need liberal pluralism to compete with us. They need strategic planning, industrial policy, and discipline, which they have.
If anything, the real danger isn’t that China is unstoppable. It’s that we keep refusing to build a vision at home that can compete, not just with their economy but with the sense of national purpose they project.
Ironic post is ironic.
superrific
Legend of ZZL
- Messages
- 8,162
This is overstated. As productivity rises, the ratio of young to old matters less and less. Too much is being made of the population decline.
In a world of extensive (if not complete) automation, capitalism will break down. Or, perhaps a better way of thinking about it is that capitalism would have prevailed. It would have reached its end goal: providing the organization and technology to maximize economic well being. At that point, the main concern of government will be distributional, and capitalism doesn't have a theory of distribution. In a sense, that's one of its superpowers. But if the robots do everything, few people will have a greater than zero marginal productivity. There will have to be a different way of dividing the spoils than the market.
We have a LOT of work to do to adjust to that future, should it arrive. China has less work to do in that regard, because their societal and economic model already relies on the state making distributional decisions, according to an established ideology.
It's entirely possible that, after full automation of the economy, Marx's prediction of the downfall of capitalism and the rise of socialist/communist political systems will finally be realized, a couple of centuries too late.
This is all speculative, of course, but it's not more speculative than any other theory about the future.
superrific
Legend of ZZL
- Messages
- 8,162
1. China's "struggling economy" grew at 4.5% last year. "Struggling" is relative, one supposes. It's easier to grow when the baseline is lower per capita, so I'm not saying China's economy is currently superior to Western economies. But let's get the facts on the table.
2. Huge reliance on imports? Come again?
3. I've already addressed aging population and declining birthrate.
These factors matter when the individual is the key unit of production. When that ceases to be true, they become far less important than what the economists call industrial organization. The industrial organization of the future will not exactly follow its past.
superrific
Legend of ZZL
- Messages
- 8,162
I don't know about the national purpose part -- I'm not sure how important that is, or whether it exists outside of propaganda.
I agree with the rest of it.
Centerpiece
Iconic Member
- Messages
- 2,164
Before long, after too much Maga, Trumplandia will be the same. Not a threat. It used to be but no longer.
- Messages
- 2,707
because it's true
Paine
Iconic Member
- Messages
- 2,058
Anyone with a basic grasp of Chinese political culture, or even just an ear for how their leadership talks, can see that national purpose is central to their model. It’s not just economic planning or propaganda, it’s a story: of civilizational continuity, of recovery from humiliation, of regaining rightful global standing.
The U.S. used to understand this too.
- Messages
- 644
"China is not a threat. It used to be but no longer."
u keep believing that, francis
u keep believing that, francis
superrific
Legend of ZZL
- Messages
- 8,162
Well, right. It clearly exists within the propaganda. It clearly exists in the statements of ideology, which have never been terribly meaningful under the CCP because the people in charge are not constrained by the rules.
Do the people share in that view? The Chinese scholars I knew generally thought not. By Chinese scholars, I don't mean scholars of China (I don't have much interaction with that world); rather, I mean people who come to the States from China to do scholarship, some of which is in corporate law. They tell a story of a population that views the government as more or less a big corporation with a secret police. The government provides jobs and something of a safety net and the communism shit, the Maoist cooptation of traditional Chinese energy, and the "national purpose" doesn't really resonate with the people. We just don't know this because their voices are suppressed.
I realize that people who left China to come to the US (even temporarily) are not fully representative of the Chinese people but they are a lot more knowledgeable than I am. Also, their stories match what I've read.
Paine
Iconic Member
- Messages
- 2,058
I don’t doubt that your scholar friends are thoughtful, but I’d caution against universalizing the views of a narrow, elite stratum educated in the West. There’s a difference between ideology as top-down doctrine and national purpose as lived emotional resonance. One doesn’t cancel the other out.
- Messages
- 20,941
Possibly related:
—> https://www.wsj.com/business/energy...1?st=P7Bfie&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
“… Iran exports around 1.7 million barrels of crude a day, less than 2% of global demand. The U.S. reimposed sanctions on Tehran’s oil exports in late 2018, a few months after President Trump withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal during his first term.
… Most countries won’t touch Iran’s sanctioned crude, so Tehran is forced to sell at a discount and find covert ways to get it onto the market. It uses a “dark fleet” of tankers that sail with their transponders turned off to ship cargoes of oil.
…
The discount on Iran’s oil compared with a similar grade of nonsanctioned crude such as Oman Export Blend is currently around $2 a barrel, according to Tom Reed, vice president of China crude at commodity data provider Argus Media. The gap has narrowed recently because of worries that conflict with Israel and stricter enforcement of U.S. sanctions could disrupt Iranian supply. The discount has been wider in the past, averaging $11 in 2023 and $4 in 2024.…”
If Iran’s Oil Is Cut Off, China Will Pay the Price
Chinese refineries have become hooked on cheap imports of sanctioned Iranian crude
—> https://www.wsj.com/business/energy...1?st=P7Bfie&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink“… Iran exports around 1.7 million barrels of crude a day, less than 2% of global demand. The U.S. reimposed sanctions on Tehran’s oil exports in late 2018, a few months after President Trump withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal during his first term.
… Most countries won’t touch Iran’s sanctioned crude, so Tehran is forced to sell at a discount and find covert ways to get it onto the market. It uses a “dark fleet” of tankers that sail with their transponders turned off to ship cargoes of oil.
…
The discount on Iran’s oil compared with a similar grade of nonsanctioned crude such as Oman Export Blend is currently around $2 a barrel, according to Tom Reed, vice president of China crude at commodity data provider Argus Media. The gap has narrowed recently because of worries that conflict with Israel and stricter enforcement of U.S. sanctions could disrupt Iranian supply. The discount has been wider in the past, averaging $11 in 2023 and $4 in 2024.…”
HintonJamesHeel
Esteemed Member
- Messages
- 608
I’m talking about the perception that was long held that China would become the predominant superpower in the world. That is not going to happen.
Paine
Iconic Member
- Messages
- 2,058
Sure, maybe they won’t dominate the world, but that’s a strawman. The issue isn’t whether China becomes the lone superpower, it’s that they’ve shown how strategic planning and national cohesion can produce serious global leverage.
Meanwhile, we’re stuck in drift and denial, with leaders who can’t even name a common goal beyond “preserve the status quo.” If we keep brushing off China’s model as irrelevant, we’re just excusing our own stagnation.
- Messages
- 1,220
To the extent that language is a surrogate for diversity, I agree that China does have some diversity.
And if language spoken is a surrogate for divesity, then I could not find a map showing such divesity in the US. However I did find a map showimg language spoken at home. Not much diversity.
ETA: My Dad was stationed with the Marines in China in the aftermath of WW2. His home base was the Portuguese Barracks in Tianjin. Two of his observations about that time have always stuck with men. 1. The land controlled by Chiang Kai-Shek in China was limited to the appoximate square yard directly underneath the feet of a US Marine. 2. When travelling in China, my father was always accompanied by an interpreter. But approximately every twenty miles travelled required his interpreter to find a second interpreter to speak to anyone local.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 835
Speak for yourself douchebag