Strannik Posted May 15, 2023 Posted May 15, 2023 A catch all for the many thread hijacking conversations that center on the shifting realities of the so-called RBIO (rule based international order) which was born as an euphemism for the Pax Americana and the intentions and actions of the word players interested in the dismantling it. Current de-facto world order that took it's place in 1991 (but in reality at least a year earlier) with the dissolution of the USSR is under attack.
Strannik Posted May 15, 2023 Author Posted May 15, 2023 Fiona Hill (former Sr. Dir. for EU/RU at NSC) - https://lmc.icds.ee/lennart-meri-lecture-by-fiona-hill/: the RU/UA war that Putin ignited has transformed into a war with global ramifications but it's not (as Putin and others claim) a proxy war between the “collective West" against Russia - it's effectively a proxy for a rebellion by Russia and the “Rest” against the United States the war in Ukraine is perhaps the event that makes the passing of pax Americana apparent to everyone Russia has cleverly exploited deep-seated international resistance, and in some cases open challenges, to continued American leadership of global institutions in 2023 we hear a resounding no to U.S. domination and see a marked appetite for a world without a hegemon - not just Russia that seeks to push the United States to the sidelines in Europe China that wants to minimize and contain U.S. military and economic presence in Asia so both can secure their respective spheres of influence but other countries (“middle powers” or “swing states”—the so-called “Rest” of the world) seek to cut the U.S. down to a different size in their neighborhoods and exert more influence in global affairs
Josh Posted May 15, 2023 Posted May 15, 2023 The only alternative I can see to "Pax Americana" is a "Chinese Century". The only other block that comes close in terms of military and economic capability is...Europe, which arguably is just a subset of Pax Americana. Over a long enough time frame, perhaps India. So the question seems rather simple: does China continue to build economic and military power such that it can eclipse the US or not? If so, then the world will realign around China, particular those geographically closest to it and those who have the most to gain by getting out from under US economic and military hegemony. If not, some slightly altered flavor of the status quo endures for the time being, as there is no other economic or military power, let alone both, on the horizon.
lucklucky Posted May 15, 2023 Posted May 15, 2023 (edited) Quote Russia has cleverly exploited deep-seated international resistance Hmm . No, au contraire . Russia could have build up the sentiment against American Progressive colonialism. They had time in their side with Americans increasingly being Americans disconnecting from Europe. The Russians could even have made their country more than one tool: they always have the hammer but they don't have the pen, the creation . But instead of being smart choose tto remain a XX Century pegged to only an old form of power. To control the world you need a global ideology - people need to feel some representation there. You need soft and hard power and you need peaceful and formal power transitions. US was great at soft and hard power until the 90's, then Progressive Colonialist movement defeated the Liberal order. That gave Russia an huge chance but they throw it away. Edited May 15, 2023 by lucklucky
Strannik Posted May 15, 2023 Author Posted May 15, 2023 The factors determining China's current position in international order are it's national interests and it's vision of the most effective ways to achieve these interests: security, sovereignty and development. China doesn't offer a unitarian ideology claiming the only correct way to live, it's content to do business mostly without strings attached. Granted this can change and if/when China becomes a hegemon it also would start abusing its position as currently does the US, but that's a remote hypothetical at the moment.
Strannik Posted May 15, 2023 Author Posted May 15, 2023 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Strannik said: Granted this can change and if/when China becomes a hegemon it also would start abusing its position as currently does the US, but that's a remote hypothetical at the moment. Here is Elbridge Colby (one of the biggest and loudest China/Taiwan hawks) explaining in 30 sec why fortress America "won't work" Edited May 15, 2023 by Strannik
EchoFiveMike Posted May 15, 2023 Posted May 15, 2023 "We" built the Chinese problem. At least our money did. We stopped building shit, we sold them everything they're using to defeat us. They don't address this issue because these globalist cunts all got rich off selling us out and now they want to transition to the next money grab. S/F...Ken M
Josh Posted May 16, 2023 Posted May 16, 2023 1 hour ago, Strannik said: The factors determining China's current position in international order are it's national interests and it's vision of the most effective ways to achieve these interests: security, sovereignty and development. They also seemed to have a very outsized opinion on what any corporation or country says about them, to the extent of running their own police stations inside other countries and blacklisting anyone who violates their foreign policy, even random US celebrities. That is hardly just "security, sovereignty, and development", IMO. Unless they feel that anyone actually spreading the truth about their government is a security concern, which I do consider quite likely. 1 hour ago, Strannik said: China doesn't offer a unitarian ideology claiming the only correct way to live, it's content to do business mostly without strings attached. Everyone who took a Belt and Road loan would like to have a word with you about the strings that were attached. 1 hour ago, Strannik said: Granted this can change and if/when China becomes a hegemon it also would start abusing its position as currently does the US, but that's a remote hypothetical at the moment. I'd argue that there are plenty of countries that already think China is abusing its position, considering it has almost no allies in their region outside Myanmar, North Korea, and Pakistan when the wind blows the right way.
Strannik Posted May 16, 2023 Author Posted May 16, 2023 (edited) 22 minutes ago, Josh said: Everyone who took a Belt and Road loan would like to have a word with you about the strings that were attached. I'd argue that there are plenty of countries that already think China is abusing its position... Try to tell a bank you are taking a loan from they should not be asking anything from you If you are buying stuff for cash (and if the seller is a monopolist the strings will still be attached) - then it's a different story. Hey, it's a competition between the "abusers" - precisely the beauty of multi-polar world and the countries will be choosing with whom and how and when to deal with... Edited May 16, 2023 by Strannik
Strannik Posted May 16, 2023 Author Posted May 16, 2023 1 hour ago, EchoFiveMike said: ... these globalist cunts all got rich off selling us out and now they want to transition to the next money grab The unhinged self interest is the essence of the capitalist society, so your complaints are the opposite side of Roman's lamentations about "pro-western Russian elites".
futon Posted May 16, 2023 Posted May 16, 2023 ASEAN hasn't been sold on letting it fall into a China orbit. https://www.iseas.edu.sg/articles-commentaries/state-of-southeast-asia-survey/the-state-of-southeast-asia-2023-survey-report-2/
Ivanhoe Posted May 16, 2023 Posted May 16, 2023 3 hours ago, Strannik said: The unhinged self interest is the essence of the corporatist society, so your complaints are the opposite side of Roman's lamentations about "pro-western Russian elites". FIFY
Josh Posted May 16, 2023 Posted May 16, 2023 4 hours ago, Strannik said: Try to tell a bank you are taking a loan from they should not be asking anything from you If you are buying stuff for cash (and if the seller is a monopolist the strings will still be attached) - then it's a different story. If the bank simply wants its money back, sure. If you borrowed from some guys that can ruin you economically and you're in their pocket, that's different. I'm hardly a fan of the IMF or its policies on loans, but nobody cedes their ports or other infrastructure to the IMF. 4 hours ago, Strannik said: Hey, it's a competition between the "abusers" - precisely the beauty of multi-polar world and the countries will be choosing with whom and how and when to deal with... As long as you are willing to characterize China as an abuser as well as the US I have no argument. The post I responded to implied China had no policy goals that weren't similar to US hegemony attached to its loans and I think we both no that isn't true.
Josh Posted May 16, 2023 Posted May 16, 2023 4 hours ago, Strannik said: The unhinged self interest is the essence of the capitalist society, so your complaints are the opposite side of Roman's lamentations about "pro-western Russian elites". Self interest is the essence of human nature. All we're fighting over is the mechanism of exploitation, who exploits who, and how much is extorted.
seahawk Posted May 16, 2023 Posted May 16, 2023 People are just done with the West as a leading power. The corruption and moral decay can no longer be hidden and that is why people rise up against Western influence.
Stuart Galbraith Posted May 16, 2023 Posted May 16, 2023 So lets swap western moral decay and corruption, for Asian moral decay and corruption. Much win!
futon Posted May 16, 2023 Posted May 16, 2023 Up to y'all whether or not y'all value the basic premise of below, caveats granted of course. It quite literally is the make or break point, regardless of w/e disinformation there is.
Strannik Posted May 16, 2023 Author Posted May 16, 2023 (edited) 10 hours ago, Josh said: Self interest is the essence of human nature. All we're fighting over is the mechanism of exploitation, who exploits who, and how much is extorted. Obviously self interest is the major dominant human trait that gets into a conflict with social interest. The point is that different systems handle this conflict differently: capitalism gives priority to the former while socialism (or as ignorant, folks call it communism) favors latter. And yes, there is no pure capitalism present (at least in 1st world) for at least 100 yrs and the attempt to stick to purity of socialism is what caused the collapse of the USSR, but I am glad you at least don't deny the fact that there is exploitation going on. @Ivanhoe attempt to blame the sorry state of affairs on corporations (who are people too ) is just a misnomer, since they are just a feature of late stage capitalism. Also while we are at it - it's the turn back to the social interest/Marxism that happened under Xi what started to bother the usual suspects before any military scenarios. Vs what happened in Russia where even after 2014 elite was allowed to keep all there ill gotten gains in the West. And that, in addition to getting himself into the position where he was not aware of the real state of the armed forces and UA situ and not having plan B, is also on Putin. Edited May 16, 2023 by Strannik
Strannik Posted May 16, 2023 Author Posted May 16, 2023 9 hours ago, Josh said: As long as you are willing to characterize China as an abuser as well as the US I have no argument. I don't believe in state altruism, and the point is that US had wasted all the good will in a record time and now the greater part of the world is happy to be having choices. And China is far from the position which will allow it to be as nefarious as USA is atm.
Josh Posted May 16, 2023 Posted May 16, 2023 11 hours ago, seahawk said: People are just done with the West as a leading power. The corruption and moral decay can no longer be hidden and that is why people rise up against Western influence. Perhaps, but who else besides China has the economic, technology, and military to confront it in any way? Is anyone going to invest in rubles or pesos?
Josh Posted May 16, 2023 Posted May 16, 2023 8 hours ago, Strannik said: I don't believe in state altruism, and the point is that US had wasted all the good will in a record time and now the greater part of the world is happy to be having choices. And China is far from the position which will allow it to be as nefarious as USA is atm. China has a track record of being nefarious whenever it has the power to do so, which is hardly encouraging.
Strannik Posted May 22, 2023 Author Posted May 22, 2023 (edited) https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-04-18/de-dollarization-is-happening-at-a-stunning-pace-jen-says?leadSource=uverify wall Dollar represents 58% of reserves, down from 73% in 2001. The dollar's share in global reserves slid last year at 10 times the average speed of the past 2 decades. Edited May 22, 2023 by Strannik
rmgill Posted May 22, 2023 Posted May 22, 2023 On 5/16/2023 at 10:08 AM, Strannik said: I don't believe in state altruism, Then how can you give any plaudits to socialism which by its very nature relies upon the altruistic behavior of the state which owns and controls everything?
Strannik Posted May 22, 2023 Author Posted May 22, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, rmgill said: Then how can you give any plaudits to socialism which by its very nature relies upon the altruistic behavior of the state which owns and controls everything? That's because you took my quote out of the context: international relations. Firstly I don't subscribe to pure socialism as a viable solution due to the same reasons there is no pure capitalism anywhere (where you would want to live anyway) - human psychology. I prefer the social state where interests of people not corporations are placed at the top, workers are shareholders, political system provides real choice and not a kabuki theater with a billion dollar admission ticket and kids are groomed from the early age in schools in ethics, psychology, critical analysis skills and political science to grow up as equipped citizens. All this can only be achieved at a state level. Edited May 22, 2023 by Strannik
rmgill Posted May 22, 2023 Posted May 22, 2023 (edited) 7 hours ago, Strannik said: I prefer the social state where interests of people not corporations are placed at the top, workers are shareholders, political system provides real choice and not a kabuki theater with a billion dollar admission ticket and kids are groomed from the early age in schools in ethics, psychology, critical analysis skills and political science to grow up as equipped citizens. Capitalism is the idea that what you pay for you own. Its not corporatism. Capitalism means that people who own something are the first who should have a say in its use. I don’t know why so many confuse corporatism with capitalism. How does the ethics of someone who doesn’t own your property has an over-riding say for how you can use it or if they can take it away if more of them think and vote it to be theirs? We saw how that worked starting with the French Revolution. Also, WHO’s ethics? Who gets to decide? 7 hours ago, Strannik said: All this can only be achieved at a state level. If it can all he achieved at the state level it can all he taken away. The power to effect all that means too much power and someone will step in and take over. As to your original context… how the hell was the USSR or any other communist block nation ethical, moral or gentle when it came to foreign relations? Perhaps we can poll the Client states of the USSR for their past good feelings? Edited May 22, 2023 by rmgill
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now