I think the missing parts of your analysis are the populations of the West. Ignoring the bourgeoisie, there's the petite bourgeoisie, the labor aristocracy, the proletariat, and the lumpenproletariat.
The petite bourgeoisie and the labor aristocracy has a huge chance of converting their nations to full white nationalist.
The proletariat is a wild card, but also small because there is not much production happening in the West.
The lumpen is pretty huge, getting more militant, have surprisingly kept revolutionary ideas alive, and have an identity that includes historical revolutionary movements.
If the USA sanctions China, China will suffer economically, but they have a massive network and massive population - they will adapt. If China sanctions the USA the social fabric will deteriorate very quickly. Same in Europe. Europe has been trying to get closer to China to avoid the USA isolating them from the productive economies of the world because they know that their people will revolt if they can't get their cheap goods.
The USA seems like it's deliberately building a white nationalist movement to carry it through a social collapse, but Europe is more of a patchwork with some countries building a successful white nationalist movement and others not.
I think a lot of what happens in the next decade really depends on what ends up happening in Africa starting with Niger. If China and Russia are successful in supporting the liberation movements there. If the West risks getting cut off from both raw materials and finished goods, the only option they will have is proxy warfare simultaneously in Africa, Europe, and South America. Given the history of guerilla success against Western military doctrine, conflict on 3 continents will be unmanageable and if the West attempts it they will burn through their reserves too quickly. It will still be a decade of bloodshed, but the internal conflicts will be the sharpest they have ever been in the history of the West and I'ma West will be at its lowest production levels in history. I think these two things are going to be critical components of the next 2 decades of history.
Potential conflict between US and Africa is kinda weird for me right now. For years I was confident that the next big hot war would be in that continent after the Middle East for the reasons you listed but it ended up being in Ukraine instead. And tracking the American troop deployments atm, they're largely concentrated near China and more recently, Iran
I wonder if the failures in Syria, Afghanistan, and Iraq has caused the US to switch focus and target the kings directly. Or possibly the presence of French and Wagner soldiers are deterring them away
The most hope I have ever felt was when the US intelligence apparatus tries and failed to create second and third fronts against Russia in the caucauses, followed by the coup in Niger which signalled that not only did the West not have control but that Russia was capable, with a much smaller military, of maintaining three objectives simultaneously (Ukraine, reserved homeland defenses, material support for Niger and others).
My best guess on how it's come to this is that the USSR, despite all it's failures, was perfectly suited to a) defending the homeland militarily and b) outperforming Western intelligence including spy hunting. I think China intelligence likely collaborated with the KGB to develop similar spy hunting capabilities even during the split, and the PLA demonstrated how to safely break Western indoctrination and maintain loyalty. I think these things have created the conditions to outperform the US on intelligence in some dimensions, obviously not all.
My continued hope is that the US does not have the intelligence it needs to outmaneuver the global resistance, though we know full well they are more than equipped to completely outmaneuver domestic threats.
I think the missing parts of your analysis are the populations of the West. Ignoring the bourgeoisie, there's the petite bourgeoisie, the labor aristocracy, the proletariat, and the lumpenproletariat.
The petite bourgeoisie and the labor aristocracy has a huge chance of converting their nations to full white nationalist.
The proletariat is a wild card, but also small because there is not much production happening in the West.
The lumpen is pretty huge, getting more militant, have surprisingly kept revolutionary ideas alive, and have an identity that includes historical revolutionary movements.
If the USA sanctions China, China will suffer economically, but they have a massive network and massive population - they will adapt. If China sanctions the USA the social fabric will deteriorate very quickly. Same in Europe. Europe has been trying to get closer to China to avoid the USA isolating them from the productive economies of the world because they know that their people will revolt if they can't get their cheap goods.
The USA seems like it's deliberately building a white nationalist movement to carry it through a social collapse, but Europe is more of a patchwork with some countries building a successful white nationalist movement and others not.
I think a lot of what happens in the next decade really depends on what ends up happening in Africa starting with Niger. If China and Russia are successful in supporting the liberation movements there. If the West risks getting cut off from both raw materials and finished goods, the only option they will have is proxy warfare simultaneously in Africa, Europe, and South America. Given the history of guerilla success against Western military doctrine, conflict on 3 continents will be unmanageable and if the West attempts it they will burn through their reserves too quickly. It will still be a decade of bloodshed, but the internal conflicts will be the sharpest they have ever been in the history of the West and I'ma West will be at its lowest production levels in history. I think these two things are going to be critical components of the next 2 decades of history.
Potential conflict between US and Africa is kinda weird for me right now. For years I was confident that the next big hot war would be in that continent after the Middle East for the reasons you listed but it ended up being in Ukraine instead. And tracking the American troop deployments atm, they're largely concentrated near China and more recently, Iran
I wonder if the failures in Syria, Afghanistan, and Iraq has caused the US to switch focus and target the kings directly. Or possibly the presence of French and Wagner soldiers are deterring them away
The most hope I have ever felt was when the US intelligence apparatus tries and failed to create second and third fronts against Russia in the caucauses, followed by the coup in Niger which signalled that not only did the West not have control but that Russia was capable, with a much smaller military, of maintaining three objectives simultaneously (Ukraine, reserved homeland defenses, material support for Niger and others).
My best guess on how it's come to this is that the USSR, despite all it's failures, was perfectly suited to a) defending the homeland militarily and b) outperforming Western intelligence including spy hunting. I think China intelligence likely collaborated with the KGB to develop similar spy hunting capabilities even during the split, and the PLA demonstrated how to safely break Western indoctrination and maintain loyalty. I think these things have created the conditions to outperform the US on intelligence in some dimensions, obviously not all.
My continued hope is that the US does not have the intelligence it needs to outmaneuver the global resistance, though we know full well they are more than equipped to completely outmaneuver domestic threats.