Neither do I think it’s signs of the West wanting conflict with China, I think it’s the opposite, a deterrence for China
You are underestimating the gravity of the implications of American military buildup around Taiwan. It would be kinda like if China started building bases and sending carriers around Hawaii to prevent an American invasion.
I recognize the way China thinks about it, but the way the world is is that the United States already controls Hawaii, there would be no change to the situation on United States placing more assets there and occupying further. No real resistance or anything would be expected for American soldiers increasing the garrison on the island.
China does not control Taiwan, there would be resistance. The geopolitical reality is that there’s no way for China to peacefully walk in assume control to put an end to the civil war. Not only that but trade that many countries rely on would change hands to what they may believe to be less reliable hands.
I recognize the Chinese perspective, but the reality is different from Chinas desire and not recognizing that leads to situations like this.
I also don’t think it’s already decisively concluded in favor of China. Taiwan doesn’t need to win, they only need to outlast a China that’s in decline. The instability from these kinds of decisions is pretty great and this was caused by China, not the United States, the United States is responding to what they see as Chinese buildup with their own buildup. There has been a multi generational draw down in American military in the region before China began the build up that the United States is not responding to.
Should also consider that the United States isn’t only building up around Taiwan, the United States has many obligations in the region that are threatened by Chinese buildup that they must respond to if they want to keep their alliances in the region.
So while there’s some danger for China because of the America. Response to their build up I think it’s something that China must e expected when they built up their own military around American allies in the region, regardless of Taiwan.
Let’s just wait and see how this “Chinese decline” pans out 5-10 years from now, ok? I just want to know, if the opposite happens instead and China keeps outpacing the West, will you admit your analysis was wrong? What evidence would it take for you to see to change your mind?
I recognize the Chinese perspective, but the reality is different from Chinas desire
Go look up the 1970’s US and China Joint Communique, and see whose actually based in reality. The US, on paper, pretends to agree to China’s One China policy but it acts belligerently by supporting seperatism in Taiwan.
they only need to outlast a China that’s in decline.
okay gordon chang
United States has many obligations in the region that are threatened by Chinese buildup that they must respond to if they want to keep their alliances in the region.
Like in Japan? South Korea? with Taiwanese seperatists? In the phillipines? In other words, all places that have US backed regimes? How convenient.
Yes, this is the reality of politics, lines on maps aren’t realities on the ground. That goes both ways
I haven’t read Gordon chang, but I think the demographics situation of China will reduce growth and see a decline in China. I don’t think that’s a controversial thing to say in a geopolitical context, what about it do you disagree with?
Yes, in all of the places that the United States has allies. That is an inherent backing but I think the people there are the main thing keeping the current political groups in power in those countries. If China, for instance, believed they wouldn’t need to violently overthrow the current rulers of Taiwan and the people backing them they could just go there and assume control bloodlessly. I think they don’t because they fear the Taiwanese people acting to stop them to maintain the current political reality of the island. It’s not Americans that woild act to stop landings, it’s Taiwanese people.
For just one example of how ridiculous this sounds, the Chinese-based Deepseek recently made mockery of the billions invested in AI in the west, so much so it fucked with the western stock market AI investment bubble, just by fact of Deepseek existing and being much more efficient training, and meanwhile the US has a meme-based billionaire purging government agencies under the administration of a WWE-style mob boss president.
nononono you see china posted declining growth rates in consecutive years, its a trend now it will repeat for a century and china will have 300m citizens by 2100. china has collapsed, viva the united staets
I’m not really looking at the situation from these minor perspectives like ai, the reality of Chinese demographics is enough to show that there’s a certain decline looming around China and this presents a current best opportunity for China to achieve its outward facing goals as a decline in growth will limit its future capabilities to achieve those goals
You say this as if the whole world’s population isn’t projected to peak at 11 billion then stagnate (even africa, the current fastest grower). Like, I don’t get this obsession with focusing on Chinese birthrates.
It is a very weird obsession, especially since we know what birth rates look like in Europe, Japan, South Korea, etc. Basically all developed countries. Even the US would be having problems if it wasn’t compensating with immigration.
It’s also indicative of an inability to think outside of the capitalist paradigm of infinite growth. Just because capitalism is in trouble once growth stops doesn’t mean that socialism works the same way.
And ultimately it is a form of projection, as it is Europe and the US that have much worse social contradictions festering at the moment for which there is no obvious solution within their current system.
My prediction is that, as with all of the “China will collapse” predictions that have been made for the past 30+ years, this one too will turn out to be a nothing-burger. The Chinese government will figure out ways to deal with the changing demographic realities that come with being a highly developed country and that will be that.
Automation will play a big part in the transition, as increasing the productivity of each individual worker means one worker can sustain more people. Where in capitalism automation only exacerbates the social problems by putting people out of a job, socialism can turn automation into a social boon by allowing people to work less and have more free time for things such as a family.
If US AI just lost $1 trillion in market cap after the release of a model in China that cost $5 million to make, and uses 30% less resources to run, what does he that say about the US AI market?
As others have pointed out, birthrates in all industrialized nations go down when women are given the opportunity to participate in the labor market equally. Even in countries with exceptional socialized family support, those supports do not increase birth rates.
the reality of Chinese demographics is enough to show that there’s a certain decline looming around China
In the process of industrialization, the development of personal awareness, the pursuit of a high-quality life and women’s increased participation in the economy have always led to a decline in fertility rates. China isn’t immune to this. China’s demographic situation is a natural outcome driven by the nation’s economic and social development. This phenomenon is quite common. There is no need to exaggerate its influence.
You are underestimating the gravity of the implications of American military buildup around Taiwan. It would be kinda like if China started building bases and sending carriers around Hawaii to prevent an American invasion.
I recognize the way China thinks about it, but the way the world is is that the United States already controls Hawaii, there would be no change to the situation on United States placing more assets there and occupying further. No real resistance or anything would be expected for American soldiers increasing the garrison on the island.
China does not control Taiwan, there would be resistance. The geopolitical reality is that there’s no way for China to peacefully walk in assume control to put an end to the civil war. Not only that but trade that many countries rely on would change hands to what they may believe to be less reliable hands.
I recognize the Chinese perspective, but the reality is different from Chinas desire and not recognizing that leads to situations like this.
I also don’t think it’s already decisively concluded in favor of China. Taiwan doesn’t need to win, they only need to outlast a China that’s in decline. The instability from these kinds of decisions is pretty great and this was caused by China, not the United States, the United States is responding to what they see as Chinese buildup with their own buildup. There has been a multi generational draw down in American military in the region before China began the build up that the United States is not responding to.
Should also consider that the United States isn’t only building up around Taiwan, the United States has many obligations in the region that are threatened by Chinese buildup that they must respond to if they want to keep their alliances in the region.
So while there’s some danger for China because of the America. Response to their build up I think it’s something that China must e expected when they built up their own military around American allies in the region, regardless of Taiwan.
Let’s just wait and see how this “Chinese decline” pans out 5-10 years from now, ok? I just want to know, if the opposite happens instead and China keeps outpacing the West, will you admit your analysis was wrong? What evidence would it take for you to see to change your mind?
Go look up the 1970’s US and China Joint Communique, and see whose actually based in reality. The US, on paper, pretends to agree to China’s One China policy but it acts belligerently by supporting seperatism in Taiwan.
okay gordon chang
Like in Japan? South Korea? with Taiwanese seperatists? In the phillipines? In other words, all places that have US backed regimes? How convenient.
Yes, this is the reality of politics, lines on maps aren’t realities on the ground. That goes both ways
I haven’t read Gordon chang, but I think the demographics situation of China will reduce growth and see a decline in China. I don’t think that’s a controversial thing to say in a geopolitical context, what about it do you disagree with?
Yes, in all of the places that the United States has allies. That is an inherent backing but I think the people there are the main thing keeping the current political groups in power in those countries. If China, for instance, believed they wouldn’t need to violently overthrow the current rulers of Taiwan and the people backing them they could just go there and assume control bloodlessly. I think they don’t because they fear the Taiwanese people acting to stop them to maintain the current political reality of the island. It’s not Americans that woild act to stop landings, it’s Taiwanese people.
For just one example of how ridiculous this sounds, the Chinese-based Deepseek recently made mockery of the billions invested in AI in the west, so much so it fucked with the western stock market AI investment bubble, just by fact of Deepseek existing and being much more efficient training, and meanwhile the US has a meme-based billionaire purging government agencies under the administration of a WWE-style mob boss president.
nononono you see china posted declining growth rates in consecutive years, its a trend now it will repeat for a century and china will have 300m citizens by 2100. china has collapsed, viva the united staets
I’m not really looking at the situation from these minor perspectives like ai, the reality of Chinese demographics is enough to show that there’s a certain decline looming around China and this presents a current best opportunity for China to achieve its outward facing goals as a decline in growth will limit its future capabilities to achieve those goals
You say this as if the whole world’s population isn’t projected to peak at 11 billion then stagnate (even africa, the current fastest grower). Like, I don’t get this obsession with focusing on Chinese birthrates.
It is a very weird obsession, especially since we know what birth rates look like in Europe, Japan, South Korea, etc. Basically all developed countries. Even the US would be having problems if it wasn’t compensating with immigration.
It’s also indicative of an inability to think outside of the capitalist paradigm of infinite growth. Just because capitalism is in trouble once growth stops doesn’t mean that socialism works the same way.
And ultimately it is a form of projection, as it is Europe and the US that have much worse social contradictions festering at the moment for which there is no obvious solution within their current system.
My prediction is that, as with all of the “China will collapse” predictions that have been made for the past 30+ years, this one too will turn out to be a nothing-burger. The Chinese government will figure out ways to deal with the changing demographic realities that come with being a highly developed country and that will be that.
Automation will play a big part in the transition, as increasing the productivity of each individual worker means one worker can sustain more people. Where in capitalism automation only exacerbates the social problems by putting people out of a job, socialism can turn automation into a social boon by allowing people to work less and have more free time for things such as a family.
If US AI just lost $1 trillion in market cap after the release of a model in China that cost $5 million to make, and uses 30% less resources to run, what does he that say about the US AI market?
As others have pointed out, birthrates in all industrialized nations go down when women are given the opportunity to participate in the labor market equally. Even in countries with exceptional socialized family support, those supports do not increase birth rates.
China is a leader in automaton and uses it’s 5 year plans to ensure they keep automaton up while demographics go down.
Declining birth rates are not sign of decline, if that were true then America is in decline, along with most other industrial nations.
In the process of industrialization, the development of personal awareness, the pursuit of a high-quality life and women’s increased participation in the economy have always led to a decline in fertility rates. China isn’t immune to this. China’s demographic situation is a natural outcome driven by the nation’s economic and social development. This phenomenon is quite common. There is no need to exaggerate its influence.