(Thread IKs:
fart simpson)
|
Posting articles and links without any kind of editorial viewpoint is huhwhat's whole gimmick, and it's the weirdest thing anybody does on this forum.
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 13:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 17:39 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/SpokespersonCHN/status/1422927791230570501 "brezhnev biden" following in hitler's footsteps in seeking world hegemony. compare the americans' words and deeds with the soviet revisionists and you can see that they are not only indulging in a hitler-like pipe dream of world domination but are behaving in a strikingly similar manner to achieve this wild ambition.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 13:24
|
|
|
Cao Ni Ma posted:hey dude, I thought you were banned from this thread for doing the exact same thing already I'd love to know how much of the "Chinese crackdown on feminism" is real, but a dump of random links out of nowhere is not a great way to start a conversation on it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 13:54
|
|
|
genericnick posted:Did I miss anything, or where does this come from?   
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 14:10
|
|
|
idk if this video from 2017 of Mark Blyth speaking about China has been posted before, but I keep coming back to it, because I honestly feel like he's the only capitalist who actually knows what the gently caress he's talking about regarding Chinese economics (tho if there are others I would be glad to see them) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYgY7Jflz9w I'm not quite as doompilled about the US economy as other folks itt, but I do feel like the US has absolutely no idea of what to do about China short of going to war with them, and if they haven't started poo poo by the time the GOP retakes the White House in 2024, then I'm pretty certain there'll be a hot war in the first few months of 2025 basically, we're all hosed
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 14:49
|
|
|
the disunity and incoherence and irrationality that keeps American capitalists tied to Chinese markets that can serve as a discouragement from an escalation into a war is also the same irrationality that could drive America to a series of uncontrolled escalations that triggers war anyway
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 15:18
|
|
|
the economic interdependence theory didn’t stop WW1
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 15:19
|
|
|
Ah thanks
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 15:21
|
|
|
Centrist Committee posted:the economic interdependence theory didn’t stop WW1 Agreed, but think of WW1 and WW2 as continuation of one big war that was only stopped by the invention of nuclear bomb. There was slightly smaller scaled european war before WW1 anyway.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 15:30
|
|
|
I would say it is unlikely beyond just nuclear weapons, but it would require an actual flash point. The war games showed if anything Taiwan wouldn’t be much of a flashpoint simply because the conflict would be over before the US reacted. The only other thing I would for the USN to block access to the Indian Ocean but that is not really that workable on a long term basis.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 16:00
|
|
|
economic interdependence meant jack poo poo when you had a bunch of neighboring powers who all had grudges with each other and quite a few of them were run by complete dipshit monarchs
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 16:19
|
|
|
HerraS posted:economic interdependence meant jack poo poo when you had a bunch of neighboring powers who all had grudges with each other and quite a few of them were run by complete dipshit monarchs The "economic interdependence" was also vastly overstated when these were directly competitive imperialist blocs. The Entente and the Central Powers all had ongoing competing interests all over the world, and bordering territories that could spark a conflict at any moment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 17:07
|
|
|
Was there actual large scaled world trade between the world powers pre ww1? Like the serious natural gas trade between Russia and Western Europe now that persuade nations not use war to settle conflicts? I have no idea what world trade was like before container shipping. I am sure the elites were all buying Rolex watches and LV luggage cases, but that's nothing compare to today's trade volume.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 17:39
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:The "economic interdependence" was also vastly overstated when these were directly competitive imperialist blocs. The Entente and the Central Powers all had ongoing competing interests all over the world, and bordering territories that could spark a conflict at any moment. Competition over colonial prospects and geo political power balance games were directly responsible for creating the alliances that went to war with each other.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 17:45
|
|
|
huhwhat posted:https://www.insider.com/meet-the-ty...snt-been-easy-1 sounds p serious op
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 18:02
|
|
|
The china thread has a huhwhat problem.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 18:52
|
|
|
huhwhataboutisms
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 19:12
|
|
|
I've seen that urban planning place he talks about, the model city is pretty cool ngl
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 20:02
|
|
|
Saw this on a different forum:quote:Lloyds of London will defeat the PRC. No shipping insurance in the warzone = no ship based imports exports into China. Economic crash ensues. The PRC probably has some contingency for formalities like that but goes to show how complicated war can be when you're dealing with hugely interlocked advanced economies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 21:20
|
|
|
Maximo Roboto posted:Saw this on a different forum: drat, I can't see any way out of that other than china massively investing in land-based transportation infrastructure
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 22:57
|
|
|
There still obviously was trade before World War 1 but it was also obviously more protectionist and most of the empires focused on inside their own territorial spaces. That said, I don’t really see a clear way for a conflict to arise compared to the 20 year lead up to the First World War. Also, honestly if there is money to be made shipping lines will switch insurance. The entire problem for the West is simply that Chinese trade is genuinely essential at this point. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 22:59 on Aug 6, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 22:57
|
|
|
Scrree posted:drat, I can't see any way out of that other than china massively investing in land-based transportation infrastructure Well fortunately they're doing exactly that! 
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 23:10
|
|
|
Maximo Roboto posted:Saw this on a different forum: yeah its called "owning boats of their own and just insuring themselves". lmao lloyds is not a supernational power broker
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 23:10
|
|
|
Scrree posted:drat, I can't see any way out of that other than china massively investing in land-based transportation infrastructure Obviously that's the long-term Belt and Road gambit but the South China Sea is still really important at present. Raskolnikov38 posted:yeah its called "owning boats of their own and just insuring themselves". lmao lloyds is not a supernational power broker Maybe not intentionally, but it seems to be the sort of weird thing that could happen in the modern age, where vulture funds can gently caress with Argentina's economy and history could've gone differently in '08 if Barclays had been permitted to purchase Lehman Brothers. The financial system is a bizarro world and China is still coupled to it - for now. Ardennes posted:Also, honestly if there is money to be made shipping lines will switch insurance. Yeah, that's the most likely result.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2021 23:19
|
|
|
Continuing with that fall of Japanese empire book, it really is just the war hawks responsible. There's too many near misses and what might have beens, but there was no reason for Japan to start a war at that time. Even with all the things road blocking negotiations there was no reason for them to stop, and eventually some kind of understanding would have probably been reached. But the army constantly pushing for a preventative war and the navy being so enthralled by Togo's surprise attack that they just couldn't wait to start that poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2021 00:34
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Also, honestly if there is money to be made shipping lines will switch insurance. The entire problem for the West is simply that Chinese trade is genuinely essential at this point. Something about selling the rope by which they'll hang
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2021 00:44
|
|
|
the trade stuff seems more a weakness on China's part - they've been papering over growing social inequality and capital accumulation by export-driven growth. there was talk about trying to accelerate the transition to a domestic consumption economic model but the politicos have given up on that happening anytime soon *shrug* i have family in shanghai and guangzhou and the amount of wealth that some branches have lucked into through property and stock investments in the past twenty years is nuts
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2021 02:31
|
|
|
Wages have been growing very quickly in China.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2021 02:43
|
|
|
come on shrike put some effort into it
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2021 02:45
|
|
|
.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2021 02:47
|
|
|
Yeah, really phoning it in at this point.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2021 02:50
|
|
|
it's been brought up quite a few times but western goons tend to focus on aspects of China's development which every Asian Tiger has gone through - focus on infrastructure spending, export-driven growth, growing middle class etc. None of which are particularly socialist Singapore which is supposedly a neoliberal tax haven has 80% of the population living in public housing Japan's thing has always been infrastructure spending I guess if you've only lived in North America, it's a novelty
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2021 02:51
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:focus on infrastructure spending, export-driven growth, growing middle class etc. None of which are particularly socialist gently caress you, trains! -Joseph Stalin
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2021 02:53
|
|
|
Also: "eliminating poverty isn't very socialist" is maybe the dumbest take on this website.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2021 02:56
|
|
|
"Singapore is a neoliberal tax haven" is a pretty hot take
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2021 02:58
|
|
|
I don't think so having actually spent time there but a lot of the Western posters here treat it as such 
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2021 02:59
|
|
|
Singapore only has public housing because it's so loving tiny that if they left it up to markets all the laborers would be priced out of the country and have to live in Malaysia.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2021 03:19
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Singapore only has public housing because it's so loving tiny that if they left it up to markets all the laborers would be priced out of the country and have to live in Malaysia. 40% of the voters got fed up enough with the increasing neolib poo poo on the island too
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2021 03:22
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Singapore only has public housing because it's so loving tiny that if they left it up to markets all the laborers would be priced out of the country and have to live in Malaysia. Whatever the reason, they got some good looking public residential towers over there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2021 03:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 17:39 |
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:"Singapore is a neoliberal tax haven" is a pretty hot take I would say it greatly diminishes the fact that Singapore is still a huge manufacturing center and port. Everything else has been discussed and rediscussed dozens of times at this point. stephenthinkpad posted:Whatever the reason, they got some good looking public residential towers over there. They do, but it doesn’t really say that much about Singapore as a model beyond the fact they were a little more cagey than some of their rivals. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 03:38 on Aug 7, 2021 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2021 03:36
|
|