• Floey@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    Don’t you think it’s much easier to leverage an ephemeral resource like coal or oil? What you frame as China acquiring leverage is better framed as a loss of leverage by the titans of oil. Time is going to cause that leverage to be lost eventually anyway, so maybe we should be planning for that? Or maybe we should let the people interested in short term gain draft the policy and complain that China is eating our cake.

    • meowmeowbeanz@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      Leverage over coal or oil is transient because those resources are finite and their relevance is waning. Fusion, however, isn’t just another energy source—it’s a cornerstone for reshaping global influence. If one nation monopolizes it, they dictate the terms of humanity’s energy future. That’s not just leverage; that’s hegemony.

      Planning for this inevitability isn’t optional; it’s survival. But letting the “titans of oil” steer the ship? That’s how we end up trading one monopoly for another. Decentralization isn’t a feel-good concept; it’s the only way to ensure no single entity holds all the cards.

      Complaining about China eating our cake while doing nothing but drafting policies? That’s how you lose before the game even starts. Accountability and action must precede lamentation.