Geopolitics in the 2020s.

[NotThePars]

It only comes across as racist if you choose it to. It's not.
The economies that China decided to copy got there through a long process. China made a conscious choice to follow them and chose to accelerate through that process.
If you think that's racist, then there's nothing much to say.
"All development is determined by historical factors". You might as well type 'gravity exists'. It doesn't change the fact that China is trying to balance an economy and political system that do not fit together. And they don't fit because they haven't grown together.
That's not even a moral judgement. It's just an observation of fact. Bizarre that you're so keen to view it as racist. But up to you.

What is the political system that goes with China’s economic system then? Feel like the last 30 years of history in the west has about undermining the democratic part of liberal democracy at least in relation to having democratic oversight of the economic levers available to western governments. Authoritarian neoliberalism is giving its best shot but you seem to think it’s destined to fail. Why?

[welshbairn]

On 08/09/2020 at 10:46, JTS98 said:

There are echoes here of pre-WW2 Japan. Rapid modernisation (often based on spying and stealing) means that China, like Japan did, has done a lot of the economic development far faster than the western nations it copied. But that just makes sense, since copying and stealing is faster than actually developing.

Japan went on a course of industrialisation from the mid 19th century and speeded up under military rule. China tried the same but a combination of externally imposed and internal instability, followed by Mao's failed experiment delayed it. Saying they only managed it by theft is like accusing America of stealing the idea of railways and steel manufacture from Britain. Britain only introduced universal suffrage and a semblance of a welfare state after about 200 years of industrialisation, liberal democracies may sometimes evolve in industrialised societies, but they're by no means a prerequisite.  

[SandyCromarty]

On 08/09/2020 at 10:46, JTS98 said:

The practical impact of China's failure to address inequality and its insistence on clinging to an out-dated and corrupt form of government.

There are echoes here of pre-WW2 Japan. Rapid modernisation (often based on spying and stealing) means that China, like Japan did, has done a lot of the economic development far faster than the western nations it copied. But that just makes sense, since copying and stealing is faster than actually developing.

The problem comes when you consider that the societies that developed naturally did so in response to social, political, and economic forces. They did things one step at a time and in a more manageable way that allowed society and politics to keep pace with the economic development. China's society has not done this. Now they have a political system and a society that are not suited to the kind of economy they are trying to run. No big shock that it doesn't work. They're out of sync and the only thing holding it all together is authoritarianism.

https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3100482/chinas-inward-facing-dual-circulation-strategy-leaves-many

The industrial acceleration was phenomenal from my perspective, on my initial working visit the main mode of transport in most cities was bicycle with some trucks here and there, and then there was big achievement factory shows of for example constructing a mud pump from scratch in 24 hours, which I know american factories took over a month to construct one but which was far better quality than the Chinese effort, anyway only a few years later and the boom took off and then Mercs and Beemers displaced the bicycles, and it seemd that the cities were at bursting point with housing developments and young engineers moaning that they couldn't afford the cost of new housing. 

[Guest JTS98]

35 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Japan went on a course of industrialisation from the mid 19th century and speeded up under military rule. China tried the same but a combination of externally imposed and internal instability, followed by Mao's failed experiment delayed it. Saying they only managed it by theft is like accusing America of stealing the idea of railways and steel manufacture from Britain. Britain only introduced universal suffrage and a semblance of a welfare state after about 200 years of industrialisation, liberal democracies may sometimes evolve in industrialised societies, but they're by no means a prerequisite.  

You seem to be the second poster assigning a moral judgement to the term 'theft' that I never intended as the main thrust of the post.

Theft between states is common, obviously. The point is that China is now at a point where things don't fit together. The article I posted I think shows a pretty good example of that.

You asserted earlier something along the lines of China being more secure than ever at the moment. I suppose that depends in what sense you mean. It's also as vulnerable as it has ever been.

It's in far more disputes globally than it can handle. And disputes with pretty powerful countries. OBOR is in retreat. Just last week saw a pretty frosty European response to a Chinese visit that says quite a lot. As I've mentioned before, it has a bundle of domestic problems. And, of course, its biggest problem is that it no longer controls information. That is catastrophic for The Party.

The parallels with pre-WWII Japan are becoming quite interesting. Quickly importing lots of ideas from outside but keeping certain red lines in terms of what outside influences are not acceptable. A new-found regional then global confidence. Building, but failing to maintain global alliances. Behaving aggressively towards other Asian countries at a time when it could have gained a lot more long-term by playing nice and was strong enough to be able to afford do so, leading to more conflict than necessary. Giving the 'old' powers a bloody nose (Japan did this militarily with Russia and, obviously, the early stages of the Pacific War, China has done so economically). An appeal to be seen as the friend of developing countries in opposition to the previous colonial powers before simply trying to stitch up these countries with similar ploys to the Europeans, losing friends as they go. A ruling elite ascribing supermanish qualities to a Big Boss leader. Political confusion below the Big Boss leader leading to poor choices. A population encouraged to look back to a romanticised past that never existed the way the rulers want people to think of it. Encouraging quite an intense form of nationalism.

A lot of it is starting to look like a film we've seen before.

Edited September 9, 2020 by JTS98

[bendan]

9 hours ago, JTS98 said:

The point is that China is now at a point where things don't fit together. The article I posted I think shows a pretty good example of that.

 

Man in Zhengzhou doesn't do as well with his honey, sesame and socks business as he'd hoped = country falling apart?

 

[renton]

8 minutes ago, bendan said:

Man in Zhengzhou doesn't do as well with his honey, sesame and socks business as he'd hoped = country falling apart?

 

Strange that, so much synergy in that combination.

[bendan]

6 minutes ago, renton said:

Strange that, so much synergy in that combination.

Yes, there's clearly something wrong when a switch from honey to socks doesn't work.

[D Angelo Barksdale]

Honey, sesame and socks ? A bold attempt to offer the consumer a diverse choice.

Trying to follow in the footsteps of this successful Leith Walk business imo.

[D Angelo Barksdale]

Someone in Congress has a P&B log in imo.

 

[Detournement]

A good thread about how US sanctions function.

[ICTChris]

More violence between Armenian and Azeri forces in Karabakh. Suggestions of Turkish involvement in the attacks, which include shelling of Stepanakert, capital of Karabakh.

[ICTChris]

[mizfit]

I seen that Pakistan has declared support for Azerbaijan.

[Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo]

12 hours ago, ICTChris said:

More violence between Armenian and Azeri forces in Karabakh. Suggestions of Turkish involvement in the attacks, which include shelling of Stepanakert, capital of Karabakh.
 

TBF, Shushan makes a lot of sense.

[ICTChris]

There are reports that militias affiliated to Turkey from Syria are fighting in Karabakh, specifically Turkmen. There has been some accusations from Turkish sources that there has been Armenian support for the Kurdish PKK. There have been Armenians fighting with the PKK linked militias and an Armenian battalion of the YPG was formed recently.

Russia’s response will be key. They have tried to play a conciliatory role in the conflict but are considered more affiliated with Armenia and have military bases in Armenia. The introduction of Syrian opposition militias on the Azeri side will potentially influence them to back the Armenians in stronger terms (doubt they will directly intervene).

[Sherrif John Bunnell]

I suppose the outcome of this depends on what side Putin decides to take? I'm sure he'd love the chance to settle a few old scores with Erdogan in a proxy war, but will be wary of falling out with his pals in Baku and Tehran.

[Dunning1874]

Turkey? Attacking Armenia? Nah, I don't believe it. There has never in history been any ill treatment of Armenia on the part of Turkey and any Turk will tell you so.

[ICTChris]

It's really hard to get accurate and unpartisan information on the conflict - Thomas de Waal is one of the go-to experts on the conflict and the region.

 

 

[ICTChris]

I follow an Armenian graphic designer who is tweeting out live information on the conflict @517design.  Some of the videos and images he tweets are pretty graphic images of conflict and war.

[SandyCromarty]

As far as the Azerbaijan economy is concerned BP with their offshore fields is the major player in the country.

At a cost of many many billions of dollars BP have installed a gas pipeline from Azerbaijan through Turkey.

No doubt the Turkish Government have benefitted financially.