Will China be able to destroy the American world order? So far they have done a pretty good job but I don't know if they will be able to manage an increasingly unstable American state which will undoubtedly resort to stronger and stronger measures in order to combat the growth of Chinese influence. Also what would this mean for socialism?
Will China be able to destroy the American world order...
James Nelson
Connor Johnson
Doubtful
Alexander Morgan
China can rely on domestic consumption now.
The damage is already done.
Nolan Cook
A U.S. that increasingly acts this way is a regime that's growing ripe for overthrow. Probably not from within but at least from without – since a U.S. that is weak will increasingly act in this reflexive, automatic and short-sighted way. Regimes operating from a position of strength tend to behave much more flexibly.
Oliver Evans
The American world order is surely on its way out, and China will definitely contribute to that, alongside other factors.
It will mean a brief period of breathing room for the left until Chinese imperialism expands to fill the void left by America. Unless the Maoist resurgence succeeds in ousting the CCP revisionists, in which case it would be a massive boost to the left.
Jason Hall
China won't replace America. There will be several empires once America loses its hegemony. America itself will still be among them but will also be competing not only with China but also Europe and Russia.
Hunter Thompson
Lol eurocucks actually believe their little union means anything
Angel Hall
...
Ethan Stewart
This. A country that tries to project strength and authority is often one that has neither, at least not as much as it used to. When you're under pressure, you make mistakes and moves that are reserved for amateurs, and launching a trade war in the position the U.S. is in is a good example.
Jacob Campbell
The US has wasted 6 times the entire world's war budget combined.
Somebody threatening the us with war is like a kitty threatening a dog.
Jack Price
I don’t think any other country has the military force capable of sustaining an empire of that size, but China is approaching that level faster than any potential competitor. I don’t doubt that other countries will get a slice of the pie, but China will probably be the dominant player.
I don’t think that that level of spending is sustainable. Without cutting it the US won’t be able to afford the socdem reforms it needs to keep its economy from imploding.
Angel Green
Also you are overlooking the soft power issue. America's control over the international financial system is waning, as is its prominence in the tech industry. It's over user.
Chase Gomez
The coming economic collapse will fucking destroy the EU. America is still a contender in the worst case scenario and Russia maybe be involved, but I believe the real darkhorse for global power is actually India.
Hudson Perez
Budget isn't 100% representative of military power. During the Cold War the USSR had a way smaller military budget than the US, but a very real chance to beat NATO in a conventional confrontation. It's not about the size of the budget but how you use it, and US DoD is bloated, corrupt and spends billions on rather questionable projects. Honestly if only Russia's recent developments like Armata and PAK-FA weren't eaten up by money laundering it could easily at least fight the US to a stalemate.
Jack Gonzalez
Modi's too busy hunting India's Muslim population with machetes Rwanda style to be the next great world fascist power
Kevin Jenkins
American leaders tend to be obsessed with "solutions" to problems but I think the Chinese see things differently; they think more dialectically in a way, which greatly frustrates American diplomats but it's just a different way of looking at the world. The Chinese don't tend to think of solutions as fixing problems, but only creating other problems, and are thinking about where they'll be in 50 years. My impression right now is that the Chinese think the Americans are making mistakes so why interrupt them?
Parker Morgan
(me)
I've heard this about meetings between the U.S. and China during the Obama administration. The American team would go in and do all this negotiating to try and hammer down an agreement on something, and then there's Xi Jinping sitting down for tea with Obama and instead of getting "down to business" in this American way, Xi goes "are we destined to be in conflict?" And of course the Americans are pulling their hair out because they see this as dawdling and need a political "win" to bring back home; but the Chinese see the Americans as being superficial and shortsighted.
Mason Sanders
Things to be optimistic about
1) despite the best efforts of the neoliberal conservative politicians, the actually growing section of the conservative constituency in the US is protectionist: their emerging (what was formerly called "altright") worldview sees international trade as a threat conjoined at the hip with the usual immigrant bogeyman. As a matter of fact, their ideology seems to be absorbing a not just protectionist but isolationist worldview, making them prone to disallow even temporary visits from the very rich of other countries for the purpose of education and diplomatic outreach. That isolationism has yet to fully manifest itself as opposition to wars and intelligence operations abroad, but it has already made them skeptical of even the most fundamental organizations representing US hegemony, like NATO. The next generation of conservative politicians, generals, advisers, and appointees in the US will likely be isolationists or protectionists mostly opposed to jingoism or exploiting foreign labor.
2) the traditional "progressive" opposition in the US, what we call the liberals, is collapsing. Their voter base are quite disillusioned with their party and its failure to create a platform which shows real diametric opposition to neoliberal policy espoused by conservatives. Appeals to minority rights ring hollow as black and Hispanic Americans, despite being loyal Democratic voters, become extremely vocal about the lack of economic/social progress in their communities. Sanders and Cortez, despite being milquetoast social liberals, remain the most radical elements of mainstream American politics since the 40s AND the most popular politicians among the Democratic base. The DNC will either have to bow to their demands (which means dismantling their relationship with large firms and banks) or simply go out quietly like the Whigs as a new firmly progressive party takes America. I cannot predict how this new political force will address geopolitics (Cortez's changed stance on Israel and Sander's vote on the bombing of Yugoslavia do not inspire confidence), but if they take any leads from the rather left-turning new social democratic movements in Europe, we might see a dramatic change in class relations in the United States, which is still good for the international working class in the long term.
3) despite an overwhelming sense among voters in the United States that their two parties are "the same", the parties are actually becoming increasingly divided on even the smallest issues. For example, the whole Kavanaugh thing: why could the Republicans not have simply replaced him with another like-minded yesman with less baggage? Why make the issue into an all out publicity debacle when there must have been a hundred other candidates to cycle through? Either of the Bushes or Reagan would have done that the instant Ford made accusations. Partisan animosity is at a height, meanwhile the politically disillusioned are (correctly) realizing that both the Democratic and Republican parties have, since the 80s, become representatives of the same blanket ideological camp, neoliberalism. These disillusioned voices are getting louder and louder, especially among young people (whether they lean conservative or socialistic) and the consensus is very quickly reaching the inevitable conclusion that the neoliberal policy platform has to GO and be replaced by something, anything else. The parties are fighting each other so savagely they aren't noticing the walls closing in.
Noah Campbell
4) the material conditions which support neoliberalism are collapsing. Short version: a neoliberal economy requires a lot of unemployment to put employers in the best bargaining position possible. Unemployment requires a lot of excess labor. The neoliberal solution to that? Look overseas. That's what modern capitalist economists call "free trade". Neoliberalism was initially facilitated by the opening of Chinese labor to the manufacture of American goods. Allowing the Chinese to work for American firms means that American workers are now competing with severely exploited Chinese workers, meaning much more potential for exploitation, meaning that according to Marxian theory we see a sizable increase in profitability and "prosperity" as American capitalists, basically the only ones investing anything in development thanks to Reagan spearheading the tradition of government spending cuts, are shoving a tiny percentage of their gains into improving things over here. But now that's changing. That initial flood of Chinese labor is wearing off as their own country reaches its industrial zenith and continues to make decent economic progress, and Jinping seems increasingly interested in expanding the state-owned section of the mixed economy, with the eventual conclusion being presumably a return to almost entirely state-owned enterprise (and full employment) and after that inevitably a return to planning. America's working class is waking up again thanks to rising employment in their own country, as without the crushing fear of being jobless they lack a reason to not strike, form unions, seek benefits, or pursue higher wages. That development might seem to be of advantage only to domestic Americans, but you have to realize that the entire basis of US hegemony for the past 40 years, the thing that arguably won them the Cold War and "defeated" socialism the first time, WAS neoliberalism. Without it, where can America go from here? Even if there is a capitalist alternative that maintains their empire, it will take a messy few years of collapse and disorder to figure it out.
5) while America closes itself up, China is opening like a flower. American news the past couple years is full of stories about China's projects overseas, about the Silk Road plans, about African development. I'm reminded of something I saw a bit ago about how the Trump administration has cancelled programs for foreigners to receive education overseas, while similar programs in China are ever-expanding. Think about what this means in the long term: whatever you think about China's state policy, the next generation of UN advisers, economic scholars, international observers, IMF staff and World Bank policymakers are going to be educated by Ricardo and Marx instead of Samuelson and Reagan. The longterm effects of this on geopolitics and the global economy cannot be exaggerated.
Henry Hill
It had already begun
Aaron Gonzalez
Let's not get a head of ourselfs. China so far has done nothing to help resolve crisis in Syria and Yemen. It doesn't help out Venezuela and does bare minimum to protect Africa from western exploitation.
There are however a lot of news of Chinese investments into economies of Germany,Uk,USa…
Luis Thomas
China should be seen as a Counterbalance to US power for now but all Socialists-Communists must privately remember the PRC's / CCP's Revisionist Nature and remember that once Socialist's have achieved significant global Power the CCP must dissolve its National-Bougie class or be seen as an enemy of the world and Chinese Proletariate and be treated as such
Jackson Myers
China will be able to reduce America’s influence in Asia, Europe and Africa, but they will never be able to revoke America’s status as a world power.
One Capitalist Empire replaces another, it means nothing.
India by 2100 will have 600 million people more than China. India, also has close ties with Japan and Australia, these three countries could make up a tripartite pact which could challenge China. India seems impoverished and unorganized now, but same could be said about China fifty years ago.
It is because America makes a shit load of cash selling weapons to other countries. Also even if America’s geopolitical power vanished overnight, they’d still be the world’s leader in military and civilian tech. Also a lot of people in America are employed in the military manufacturing Industry.
America retreats from geopolitical power, however remains a strong exporter of tech and weapons. Basically what we were in during the 1900s, but instead of cars it’s tanks.
Lucas Sullivan
By 2100 we will have nanobots an AI smarter than all of humanity combined.
I'd say by 2050 that will happen.
By then capitalism will seize to exist for reals.
Robert Stewart
Do you seriosuly not understand the concept of hegemony? A move away from a unipolar system to a multipolar order would be a massive change.
Noah Bailey
Insightful posts user.
Blake Fisher
won't exist in 30 years with current trends.
Camden Williams
Here is your (You)
Lincoln Jones
Except that the rate of improvement for transistors is slowing down. That won’t happen tell 2300 by the lateist.
We’re already in a multipolar system. China’s economy is almost as big as Bwrgerland’s. We haven’t been in a unipolar world order sense 2008.
t retard
Adam Evans
nice argument.
Daniel Martin
Did Trump throw that out the window?
Jonathan Price
Imagine the amount of proxy wars in Africa, Asia and South America that will trigger when we reach multipolarism. No wonder why Porky is funding nationalism, they don't give a shit anymore.
Leo Parker
Nothing. One imperialist nation is competing with another, emerging imperialist nation.
Nathan Baker
America is not simply "one imperialist nation." It is THE imperialist nation. The entire global financial and political system is largely built around them. There is no comparing the two countries, even if you buy the whole "China is imperialist" shit.
Caleb Martinez
No it isn’t, not in the sense you are thinking. Global capital is in some ways centred there yes, but it’s not as if it’s tied to the country as a political entity. Thinking of imperialism and capital as being joined at the hip to groups of national bourgeoise is massively outdated. Transnational corporations sprawl across the world, their capital and owners are globally dispersed, and they have no national allegiance whatsoever. The American Empire is only American insofar as American military might is what sustains it, but if that were to disappear it would simply rely on some other country, like China. America is simply the enforcer of the interests of a global ruling class, practitioners of imperialism that has no national source.
Robert Perry
...
Christopher Collins
How likely is this? What factors would make it more likely?
Thomas Green
Don’t know the answer to either of those questions. But stagnating living standards and massive growth in industrial employment (combined with abysmal conditions and wages) have spawned a renewed worker’s movement in China. This has made use of the fact that the CCP still officially adheres to Marxism and created a renewal of ML and Maoist thinking, especially among students, who have been consciously agitating among workers.
Luis Kelly
Carter Foster
Care to elaborate? Are we talking balkanization?
Jason Cruz
What are you basing this statement on? Source?
Adam Hall
Are you denying it is?
Eli Stewart
Cooper Mitchell
Seems like a trustworthy analysis.
Aiden Nelson
look up old nato docs, they expected the Soviets to reach the Atlantic in conventional conflict within a month-three months
That's why the main war plan was to turn Germany into nuclear glass to buy time to transfer more forces to euro theater
Connor Edwards
What? No it isn’t.
John Collins
...
Hunter Lewis
That's because china doesn't care. China avoids issues that provide no benefits for involvement (or where involvement is shooting yourself in the foot like syria).
Christian Perry
you're actually refuting the least important of his points. if a gaming channel properly cites their sources they can go ahead and talk about whatever the hell they want and i'll give em credibility.
Kevin Walker
I think you underestimate how much of Europe's transnational capitalist class interests are vested in the continuation of the EU.
Even British porkies don't want Britain to leave the EU, and as such they've sabotaged the Brexit process.
Hopefully you're right though and the neoliberal hydra will dissolve itself
Blake Bailey
Hence why Rise of China unless China is back to socialism is bad. It's profit driven and profit driven alone.
Brayden Butler
The rise of China is good unless it succeeds in replacing America as the sole superpower. Fortunately this is unlikely.
Lucas Kelly
If the whole world gets industrilized capitalism will collapse for real this time.
And china is doing its part.
Now as far as them having ideals i doubt it.
I mean they push around those tibet(ians?) like their nuisance.
William Baker
Yikes, i made a lot of grammatical errors…
Anthony Fisher
What's the point of replacing one superpower with another??
Fully agree
Infrastructure for resource extraction doesn't doesn't equal to industrializing a nation. As far as I know China doesn't even build (trade) schools to help out with industrialization to begin with.
Jose Flores
Most people can't comprehend a world without America leading it, everything from Halo to the avengers basically becomes just another small bit of human entertainment if America goes the dodo.
But I will say one thing, China does want America's position, but even if it gets it there is no one thing China can sell to the world aside from global trade and more lenient investment, well, except from one thing they could spread in place of America and democracy: socialism
Leo Howard
It already is
China isn’t socialist, and if it were to become Socialist again, the process wouldn’t be peaceful. It’d be a coup, or a second civil war.
Evan Perez
They propagate ML theory in schooling, which is something. Yeah it's a state capitalist disgrace of the revolution that urgently nerds a Maoist purge, but with a strong China the international left would have more breathing room. Beggars can't be choosers in this day and age .
Bentley Ross
Yes. As much as we all dislike Dengism, it's a long-term strategy. By going free market China basically decided to try to beat America and the West at its own game to avoid the fate of the USSR. The American Empire is crumbling as we all know, while China is getting stronger economically and militarily every day. All they have to do is hold out for a few more years until America collapses into internal chaos and the power vacuum will be filled by a powerful, wealthy technologically advanced China with investments and trading partners all over the world. The only thing stopping 3rd-world countries from becoming socialist is American intervention. When that's gone and China is the sole superpower, there'll be nothing stopping socialist revolutions across the world As revisionist as modern China is, I think its naive to believe that a nominally Marxist-Leninist state that educates its students on Marx' writings will never shift into a socialist mode of production. All we have to do is sit back and accelerate the American Empire's decline with Blumpf and his shitty trade ideas.
Caleb Hughes
Can't wait for china to ascend and further impoverish western petty-booj cunts like the butthurt black cats cunt ITT.
Lol @ you.
Dylan Scott
Mostly the effects of climate change, India is going to suffer pretty badly.
Alexander Reyes
Barley
Your an idiot. Most actual Maoists have been purged from the CCP, (though there are still some in civil service and the military). Anyways when socialism will be reestablished in China, it won’t be through the CCP. It’ll be through these guys. en.wikipedia.org
Jonathan Powell
My girlfriend was born and raised in China. She hates Jinping and knows that most other Chinese hate Jinping. All clever Chinese hate state capitalism. They find it amazing that America has food stamps when not even "red China" has basic assurance programs like that.
We're going to have a beautiful Eurasian child that will be natively fluent in English and Mandarin. He will probably be your children's boss because America still won't have had a revolution 30 or 40 years from now.
Cameron Murphy
Any other guys with chinese gf's or wifes here?
Jordan Barnes
So there's not even a shred of the Iron Rice Bowl left?
Brayden Robinson
Or he could be Elliot Rodger
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Thomas Rogers
China does have food vouchers?
Dominic Long
You'll find good company here:
Jace Kelly
If the US collapses economically won’t that just take China with them? They are massive trading partners after all.
Connor James
No, for good reason
Owen Rogers
I have never heard of the Chinese government promoting Marxism internationally. They invite foreign Communist parties to China, but I've never heard of them actually encouraging Marxist parties abroad. There is no indication that China will do anything except cultivate more trading partners throughout the world to expand their control of markets. I hope they prove me wrong.
derp
Evan Jackson