- cross-posted to:
- us_news@lemmygrad.ml
- usa@lemmy.ml
- globalsouth@lemm.ee
- cross-posted to:
- us_news@lemmygrad.ml
- usa@lemmy.ml
- globalsouth@lemm.ee
You must log in or register to comment.
Yet another article written by a western chauvinist who does some correct analysis of Chinese strength vs America, dances up to correct analysis of America's weakness, but fails to articulate a correct prescription for America because of a mix of racism and ideological blinders. The following is the most correct excerpt:
It is hard to look at Wall Street trends over the past thirty years without drawing the perverse conclusion that the most effective use of capital, in Wall Street’s eyes, is to pour it into financial assets or the valuations of software companies.
For over thirty years, the PRC has consistently taken the other side of this bet. The PRC evidently believes that hard assets and manufacturing capabilities are good to own, not only for their immediate economic returns but because they bring many valuable intangibles and synergies with them: a highly skilled industrial workforce, faster prototyping cycles, and mastery of supply chains. Thirty years on, can anyone really argue that the PRC bet wrong?
Edit: also note that the negative externalities/antisynergies associated with financial capitalism/deindustrialization are not mentioned - increasing wealth inequality, erosion of democracy, increasing cost of living
Like look at this
Like many Asian countries after the Second World War, we need to discipline our capital and business institutions so that we do not sleepwalk into landlordism, crony capitalism, or disaster.
A little late for that, but sure let's see what the author says about disciplining capital and business. Here's the solution:
The PRC’s internal discourse makes it painfully clear to any serious American observer that peace with China can only be sustained if we stabilize our trade and restore our strength. Any incoming administration must therefore be ready to implement a reindustrialization plan that goes far beyond ad hoc subsidies to address the larger question of why we lost industrial capacity in the first place. This plan should use tariffs and waivers as precision tools for strategic products and industries, but it must also address larger questions of tax, accounting, and finance rules that have contributed to an anti-industry investment environment. Finally, this plan must be implemented with the will to reallocate federal spending to promote world peace through American strength.
What a bunch of empty, handwaving bullshit. This is what happens when an author can correctly identify the need to "discipline capital" but has absolutely no idea what that means, no willpower to do it, and is too chauvinist to learn because it would mean learning about and applying Marxism.
I think you've nailed it, serious analysts in the west have no choice but to acknowledge that Chinese approach is outpacing the west, but they simply can't bring themselves to accept that this stems from fundamental systemic difference. That's just a bridge too far.
In all of the articles like this, there's a just barely unspoken but rock solid premise that the industrial policy approach of the West should be better than the Chinese as some natural law. There's a real reluctance to engage with non-racist thinking.
I don't disagree. If the alternative is playing candy crush or something then yeah maybe worth reading, but there are better ways to spend your time. I was getting pretty mad by the time I finished it.
Liberals are wholly incapable of recognizing flaws in the system they have built and the ideology that shapes it.
Now what?Maybe not blame all your shortcomings on Russian disinformation?
Maybe not throwing your technologies into the caprice of capitalists?
Maybe invest in some actual infrastructure instead of freeway widening?
Maybe not subjecting your populace to the cruelty of police jackboots?
Maybe not bankrolling genocide?
Maybe housing and debt relief?
Maybe healthcare?
No, you'd rather sit there and pout writing this sob story like the pathetic burgerbrain you are.
Imagine viewing life as a zero sum nihilistic battle to the death.
It’s always jarring to see the west accuse China of being bloodthirsty and warmongering, but then you look at their media and it’s just “we hope to achieve win-win business opportunities with the west and minimize conflict that initiated the cold war.”
Then you look at the peaceful, democracy loving leader of the free world, and every article is “we must kill the oriental child before the hive mind develops and takes away our freedom. It is the only way to contain the confucian menace.”
They accuse you of falling for Chinese propaganda, but even if that’s true, why would any sane, moral person want to listen to the western rhetoric?
Assuming the bourgeoisie are behind (I'm not convinced they are yet), their options will be:
- Destroy the world in nuclear war.
- Managed decline in which they enjoy their exploitation during the decline until it is no longer possible.
- Discover some magical new structure of society that is more efficient than socialism while also maintaining class relations of exploitation.
They will try for number 3, which will involve some extremely weak half-hearted attempt at reindustrialisation. This will fail because they will not have enough central control to carry it out under neoliberal ideology. They need to restore a Keynesian ideology to return to that under capital. They killed their own capability to carry out that kind of control when the Reagan/Thatcher years occurred.
We definitely are worryingly close to it. They still haven't really made up their minds. The MAD theory is being tested.
Provided we can avoid nuclear war they will first kick their legs and struggle in an attempt to prevent things happening but when that doesn't work they'll transition into managed decline and acceptance.
Indeed, my expectation that if we don't all die in a nuclear holocaust, then the US will circle the wagons and rule over a diminished empire.
My only hope that we will not see nuclear war is that they coward at heart that would like to live for eternity if possible. But there has been a worrying amount of articles pushing the idea that a nuclear war is winnable. I think that they will try a final sanction war with China at a minimum or try to use they pawns in the pacific to destroy China.
China isn't just winning, it has actually won. There's just some lag time for its victory to be recognized. America only holds supremacy in naval and air projection, but with our waning industrial output and China closing the technological gap it is a foregone conclusion that they will catch up in a decade or two.
its kinda funny, simple heuristic - current leader in industrial production favors free trade - very easily describes behavior of british empire, usa, germany (inside eu). Its not some dastardly plot.
China by nature of its population size would be world systems headache as middle income country. Its not question of reforms or trade practices, lib china would also swing production of the whole world (by ascension from 1 billion consumers to two billions).
Same would be true of india, if they were not completely captured by local compradors.
I can't believe I read that whole damn thing. Wish I brought a book today. This person's displeasure with "untranslated Chinese" spoken in the government halls of China is really something. Like, no shit. Last I checked C-SPAN isn't eager to run translations themselves.
People speaking their native language in their own country, how dare they! 🤣
I have issues with the untranslated English in the USian government halls.
Unlimited tower of Babel upon NATO government halls, actually.
A sense of the PRC’s demographic structure and geographic disparity thus explains why the CCP has publicly called for a technology and manufacturing moonshot even as it deliberately engineered the destruction of over one trillion dollars of software company share value—without, it must be said, impeding in any evident way its continued progress in telecom, chip design, or export manufacturing.
Line go down... but industry more productive?!
This is a pretty interesting read. The author is correctly identifying a major upending of US economic power... but the liberal ideological blinders are really hampering him from arriving at some obvious conclusions about what the US could be doing to maintain their dominant position.
Indeed, there's a religious belief in the power of the markets in US, and the mere idea that an economy could be structured differently is simply not possible to discuss in polite company.
