NS Military Realism Consultation Thread Vol. 11.0

[Schwere Panzer Abteilung 502]

Defeat China militarily and divide them into many small rump states too busy worrying about each other to be a credible threat?

[Erythrean Thebes]

Defeat China militarily and divide them into many small rump states too busy worrying about each other to be a credible threat?

With the current level of cynicism in China and their extreme jadedness this would never work. Their logical brains could not accept such an arbitrary system

[Zhouran]

So what should the West do?

Attempt to Foment separatism and disarray in China?

Support India as a Democratic rival to China?

Go all Eisenhower and build a stupidly large nuclear arsenal to compensate? The same way Russia has, to compensate for its weaknesses?

Accept Chinese global domination?

The first and second choices. Last choice is bad while the second-last choice wouldn't be needed since the US itself already has a larger, more-advanced nuclear arsenal than China. It's better to attack the Chinese from the inside than the outside, instigating separatism from the ethnic minorities of China.

Eppur si muove

(Image)

Once upon a time Europeans denied that America would ever surpass them (some delusional Frenchmen and Germans still do) for all sorts of reasons. Didn't help. Americans (and the ever sadder Euro gang) continue to deny China will surpass them. It doesn't help and even if the fabled China crash comes (which it will in some form, no economy develops in a straight line) there isn't good reason to believe it will change the long term trajectory anymore than the depression prevented America from surpassing Europe economically (and thus, politically, socially and militarily). Actually it makes it worse because the unshakeable faith that god is white and will surely strike the yellow man down for their hubris has become a substitute for actually doing anything.

China's economic GDP may have grown exponentially in the last 20-ish years, but its economy has slowed down. Even if the US no longer becomes the leading superpower, China still has issues that blocks its path to superpower status. Their economy maybe large, but the country itself is still a "developing nation", their HDI is high but not as high as that of the US, Japan, or Western Europe. Regarding demographics, China has an aging population and gender imbalance, plus the country faces issues regarding workers' wages. China's politics are pretty fragile which is why the Communist Party is ardent to preserve its power, the country has few real friends (most of which are tinpot dictatorships), and is surrounded by rival nations like India and Japan. The country would also have to face issues regarding their capability to innovate (copying foreign technology isn't really gonna get them ahead of the West), political corruption, and the need to bring in innovative intellectuals from abroad such as engineers and scientists (something the US strongly benefits).

The article is "wishes and prayers for Western civilization" in a nutshell. Either China gets strong, the West gets weak, or they both collapse and everyone loses, which are the only two paths ATM. The only one that is certain is the Western decline.

The second path should be the preferable alternative. If your nation declines and collapses, then it's only good if you drag your rival into the same grave.

The only thing more globalist is The Economist, Davos, or CNN Money perhaps. Aren't you supposed to be against this sort of stuff?

Still doesn't ignore the facts about China's internal fragility, ranging from their politics to their demographics.

Ideally America of 2050 will be 50% IQ 108 Japanese and 50% IQ 115 Ashkenazi instead of 50% IQ 95 Anglo-Saxon and <whatever> or something.

If that's the case for America 2050 then that implies that the US will be majority Asian or Asian-White mixed and that the population of American Jews grew exponentially. That's not the case for Future America, which would be majority Hispanic and Black, while Asians and Jews would still be small minorities just like today's America. American whites would also become the new minority in Future America.

At least I'll be really old by the time the ball picks up (like 50s or 60s) so I can look forward to freezing to death in the impoverished America.

Or dying in a Wyoming uranium mine because I'm not the Right Kind of Communist.

Shouldn't you be concern about the fate of the US and its people?

The only real question is whether we're in 1925 or 1865, TBH. JFC Fuller and Karl Marx, two of the Pantheon of NSMRC, both predicted the rise of America in those times, although JFC Fuller was a bit after the mark (America's rise occurred in 1900-1910 to assume economic hegemony of the world, and here we are 100 years later in the decline) while Karl Marx was a bit ahead of the curve (he was looking at the American Civil War and the massive industrial warfare that occurred there, and thumbed his nose at everyone's [read: Marx and Engels] favourite punching bag/That Guy/friend-but-the-one-that-you-actually-laugh-at-rather-than-with Ferdinand Lassalle who denied America being relevant) since the USA didn't really take off until 1895-1900.

I think we're in the 1860s. i.e. Early in the rise. China is slightly behind America, as America was slightly behind Europe in the 1860s, but it is rapidly growing powerful and will clobber a sick man, perhaps Russia, and devour it alive like the USA devoured the Spanish Empire who was the sick man of Europe. Cue the Great Red Fleet pushing battlewagons through the Panama Canal and a Chinese CVBG docking in Norfolk for Fleet Week or something in the 2040s. China won't totally surpass America to the extent that America has surpassed Europe today until the 2070s or 2080s. OTOH that's still a rise of about twice as fast as the United States managed when it conquered Europe, which took nearly 150-200 years. Here it takes China about 70-100.

China clobbering Russia and probably invading Siberia isn't far-fetched, but I strongly doubt the Chinese could successfully invade and occupy Siberia if the Russians were to put up stiff resistance. The idea of Chinese warships in Norfolk and passing through the Panama Canal is something the Chinese can only fantasize about.

OTOH their rapid breakout from fission to hydrogen bomb is probably the single greatest demonstration of their economic power, though, so perhaps that was the 1860s analogue of the early Chinese rise. Sadly we didn't have anyone as prescient as Karl Marx around to actually straight up tell people they're wrong, i.e. "China is a threat, and trading with China will hurt you," but they didn't listen to K.M. either. Thus they lost their independence, their colonies, their economic hegemony, and their ability to influence world affairs beyond their own Bonsai trees. So America should be getting smacked hard by China right about 10 years ago if go by the same rate of change. Which it seems to have been when the PRC stole F-35, F-22, C-17, NLOS-LS, FCS, Aegis Combat System, FGM-148, Apache, and all sorts of other advanced weapons from it.

It doesn't matter if the Chinese stole sensitive data regarding US weapons and equipment, they still lag behind in producing high quality weapons and lack experiences and expertise in doing so. Their J-20 and J-31 are still inferior to the F-22 and F-35, they still aren't as experienced as the US or Western Europe in producing military electronics, and their warships maybe ahead of what Russia has but still lags behind that of the US. If the Chinese increased their focus more on innovating and less on copying, then maybe the weapons they produce would start to rival that of their Western counterparts in regards to quality, but right now that's not the case.

Defeat China militarily and divide them into many small rump states too busy worrying about each other to be a credible threat?

The Chinese government is afraid of the PRC balkanizing like former Yugoslavia. The communist party strongly promotes a pan-collective national identity of 中华民族 or "Chinese Nation" so that the ethnic minorities don't dissent against their rule. Right now, the Uighurs and the Tibetans seem to be the only ethnic groups in the PRC to have separatist movements.

[Husseinarti]

[Ideally America of 2050 will be 50% IQ 108 Japanese and 50% IQ 115 Ashkenazi instead of 50% IQ 95 Anglo-Saxon and <whatever> or something.

oi vey

[Austrasien]

China's economic GDP may have grown exponentially in the last 20-ish years, but its economy has slowed down. Even if the US no longer becomes the leading superpower, China still has issues that blocks its path to superpower status. Their economy maybe large, but the country itself is still a "developing nation", their HDI is high but not as high as that of the US, Japan, or Western Europe. Regarding demographics, China has an aging population and gender imbalance, plus the country faces issues regarding workers' wages. China's politics are pretty fragile which is why the Communist Party is ardent to preserve its power, the country has few real friends (most of which are tinpot dictatorships), and is surrounded by rival nations like India and Japan. The country would also have to face issues regarding their capability to innovate (copying foreign technology isn't really gonna get them ahead of the West), political corruption, and the need to bring in innovative intellectuals from abroad such as engineers and scientists (something the US strongly benefits).

HDI as some smart person observed is really just a measure of how much like Scandinavia a country is. It doesn't really tell you anything useful except how well a state would fit into a hypothetical Greater Kalmar Union.

Every rich country and most not so rich countries have bad demographics these days. It says very little about relative capability. Gender imbalances don't really matter, people love this talking point because son preference makes white people uncomfortable and westerners are inclined to think everything they like is naturally superior, but the supposed catastrophes that will occur have never actually been seen, only theorized. Given modern young parsons in all advanced countries struggle to hook up even with normal gender balances and this does not cause the sky to fall it is hard to see why we should expect this to lead to anything other than more traffic for gelbooru - with so many "opting out" of relationships more or less voluntarily any notional shortage of partners who are willing and able approaches irrelevance. Poverty is a much bigger barrier (tfw can't even afford apartment in 3rd Tier city) for unmarried Chinese men seeking wives than "wife literally not born".

This is true of a lot of things. Political stability is a fuzzy concept and the arguments that China is "unstable" never amount to anything more than saying "China is a not a representative democracy" and therefore will collapse ANY DAY NOW. That the PRC has controlled China for roughly the same amount of time as the "stable, democratic" modern German, Italian and Japanese regimes and almost a decade longer than the French fifth republic is just a minor and unpleasant detail - Britain is very stable (forget about Scotland for a minute!) and as we know all western democracies are Britain and America. And that America is perfect obviously.

China has all sorts of problems but all states do; it is not how well a state stacks up against utopia that matters, but how it stacks up to other states that actually exist. And relative to other states China is gaining ground. Relative gain does not inherently imply absolute gain.

[Gallia-]

[Ideally America of 2050 will be 50% IQ 108 Japanese and 50% IQ 115 Ashkenazi instead of 50% IQ 95 Anglo-Saxon and <whatever> or something.

oi vey

You mock it yet Israel's ability to defeat all its enemies within six days or half as many weeks is telling. It took the United States a whole field army and six months to defeat just one of Israel's classic enemies.

Perhaps it is literally because Israeli planners have IQs nearly a full standard deviation higher than American ones.

So what should the West do?

Build factories, surround China's empire with Western client states, and choke it to death with export-import bans and travel bans. No one goes in or out except of within the context of China's weird third world empire.

The time to do this would have been the 1990s, though, but the West was wallowing in post-war complacency. If it comes down to the wire, a first-strike using nuclear weapons is not off the table, especially if Containment fails as a strategy. It worked for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, it may not work for the PRC, since the PRC is large enough to be an autarky by itself, much like how the Western World is large enough to become an autarky. The twilight struggle is never over, which is why complacency is death.

At the very least the United States, the Europeans, and America's Asian allies should be weaning themselves off of Chinese industry by investment in their own economies to produce real economic goods rather than cookie clicker finance markets or something. Importing Chinese cars, t-shirts, and microchips is a no-no. A free trade area over the TISA members, or perhaps a confederalization of the hypothetical TISA area, is probably the optimal strategy at this point. Man for man we'd still be outnumbered and the Chinese will likely continue to produce more real goods than the West could, but we could leverage the India-China stalemate by turning India into our own version of China. Since the TISA Free Trade Area would include the Israelis, we'll have the smarts and the lobbyists needed to infiltrate the Indian economy.

Once you become big enough the concept of autarky really does work. The Earth as a whole, after all, is the greatest example of an industrial autarky. The Soviet Union wasn't quite big enough to sustain it, mostly because of population pressures (it's half the size of the United States, let alone the entire Western Bloc), but resource-wise and area wise it was fine. Had the USSR gone the route of the NEPmen and been stocked with Ashkenazis or Han Chinese or Japanese or some other high IQ ethnic groups it would have been a much more formidable opponent. Even if it had been 100% Russian it would have been fine.

Even just agreeing to not buy Chinese steel and invest in strategic materials productions like REEs and semiconductor fabs would be an improvement at this point, though. As Viyk says it's about relative ability, not absolute ability.

Doing nothing is the worst of all plans.

other than more traffic for gelbooru

:3

Their J-20 and J-31 are still inferior to the F-22 and F-35, they still aren't as experienced as the US or Western Europe in producing military electronics, and their warships maybe ahead of what Russia has but still lags behind that of the US.

J-20 and J-31 are literally F-22 and F-35. Their warships are comparable to American warships. The only place where they are truly inferior to the United States in naval technology is in carrier construction and submarines, and they are closing this gap rapidly. Their radars are poised to become the best in the world since the Western world literally cannot make radars anymore due to exporting to PRC of all its industry.

China has gone from being in the 1950s (MiG-21s and T-55s) to being in the 1990s in about the same amount of time it took the United States to do so. With the help of a handful of The Proper PDFs and some brochures. Meanwhile the United States Army has gotten worse equipment than it had in the 1990s and it is poised to receive very little in the way of new combat gear anyway because of twenty years of endless warfare and poor procurement decisions that resulted in producing nothing more than fodder for meme spies from places like Canada.

So while China's procurement has not only been successful but wildly so, the American procurement of war equipment has been slow and steady. This is not good when, if we can say, "technological change is speeding up". Of course that is a lie. The only thing that is changing is that the West cannot make things anymore, so its ability to buy new things probably takes twice as long as it would take an economically healthy civilization to do. Europe isn't even really worth mentioning since they're stuck somewhere in the 1970s in terms of procurement, and it seems like the next U.S. fighter aircraft might just be a repeat of F-35 or F-22 with slightly modernized components, much like Eurofighter is a repeat of F-15C.

Fortunately for mankind, the Chinese are probably not going to slow down. Unfortunately for all the not!Chinese living inside the Western world, the Chinese are not going to slow down.

The true unfortunate fact is that the ROC is the only good China: it is Western, liberal, and mostly civically nationalist (I think, a lot of China's alleged "civic nationalism" is really to thumb its nose at Taiwan). And it is a target for the China that is going to take over the world: despotic, illiberal, and ethnic nationalist. White men cannot be part of the Zhonghua minzu because they are barbarians who fought the Chinese, oppressed and humiliated them, and backed the corrupt Manchu empire for dozens of years. Like Japanese national identity, you're either a quaint and funny foreigner who is cute in the sense that you might find a dog shaking hands cute, but he isn't really Japanese, or you're a barbarian who cannot understand the true culture of your betters because you simply were not exposed to it from birth. Neither would anyone who attempts to become "Chinese" really be "Chinese" in a real sense to a lot of people. Millions of people, even. They wouldn't be able to understand China because China is something that you grow up in.

It's a bit like the United States in the 19th century where you were either "white", "an quad-/octoroon pretending to be white", or "a redman pretending to be white", or "target for elimination". You might be civilized. You might know the language really well. You might even be smart, the science is still out on that, but you're never going to be really white. You'll be a cute fixture for showing off the White Man's Burden and how it really does work to bring up savages to the apex of civilization. And if you aren't, you'll be expunged from society, restricted to reservations, and more or less eliminated. Just ask the Cheyenne or Pawnee how America is for them.

The difference is the United States, while never quite growing out of its ethnonationalism, has tried really hard to do so in the past century and a half. It took a million dead to get that far. It's unclear if the Chinese will do this because they are so early in formulating their ethnic identity and a lot of it really is based on blood, or at least some manner of appearance. You might come from a barbarian tribe like "European", you might become Hua, maybe your tribe accepted as part of the Zhonghua minzu itself, but you will always be Yi. The second you forget that you get sent to the labor camps to mine for the glory of the Communist Party. Your crime: You forgot you were a foreigner.

The USA and PRC are a lot in common, actually. They're both revolutionary states. They're both powerful industrial empires. They're both historically racialist. The difference is the United States has no background besides a common thread of equally unimportant and discarded wastrels arriving on its shores, making it their own, and getting accepted after decades of hard work that goes unnoticed and unacknowledged for multiple generations amidst major questions by the rest of accepted society. Then another group shows up. "American" doesn't require you to be steeped in it from birth because no one was born American except Native Americans, and they lost. OTOH, the PRC's ethnic identity is "Hua" followed by "pet tribes" of barbarians that were domesticated in conquest.

The Communist Party will tell you different of course but you can't really escape centuries of cultural inertia. And once it becomes King it cast off its cloak and revel in its true identity. First target: Australia? Possibly. No nukes, small military, and America won't defend them. Easier to grab than Siberia. Watch out lad, they might go all IJN on you guys and we'll be too weak and effete to stop them this time.

tl;dr Both the USA and PRC are historically aspects of ethnocentric civilizations. The United States is civic nationalist and the PRC is ethnic nationalist. An ethnic nationalist civilization owning the world is bad news for non-Chinese.

Eventually all of China will be red with a small holdout of Manchu slaves toiling in the bitcoin mines or something. Just like their flag.

China has all sorts of problems but all states do; it is not how well a state stacks up against utopia that matters, but how it stacks up to other states that actually exist. And relative to other states China is gaining ground. Relative gain does not inherently imply absolute gain.

LIKE MAH BOI JOE LOUIS, THE GREATEST PRIZE FIGHTER IN ALL THE HISTORIES OF THE WORLD, SAID: "Lots of things wrong with America, but Hitler ain't gonna fix 'em."

[Purpelia]

What's with all this obsession about stopping China? Not only is it not really a topic for this thread but it is genuinely unhealthy for you. And aside from that, have you looked at the state of western civilization lately? Forced diversity, hate speech laws, economic stagnation and debt, america voting to elect between a reality TV star and a crazy globalist, the EU fragmenting as democracy and free speech are banned, OTAN being unable to do as much as stop Russia from annexing half of a nation that's on its border...

The west has many problems to fix before it can even contemplate challenging China. And the threat is not China rising up tomorrow to become a superpower but the west failing to recover at all and becoming a place not worth dominating for the Chinese.

[Gallia-]

Not only is it not really a topic for this thread

>Literally a war with China
>Not really a topic for NSMRC

Purpelia.bmp

between a reality TV star and a crazy globalist

>between

[Theodosiya]

Well, trying to take this back to rail, even though I'm not sure this would be taken very seriously...

SO, regarding TNI (all, Army, Navy, Air Force), can anyone tell me, with very specific detail, about what reforms, equipment and weaponry purchases necessary to make it competent and competitive enough compared to Australia (only, not counting allies), Singapore, Vietnam and Malaysia? Or at least very good and sufficient for defense, or give anyone planning to invade bloodied nose or at least takes time to think about the worth and cost.

[Gallia-]

with very specific detail, about what reforms, equipment and weaponry purchases necessary to make it competent and competitive enough compared to Australia

Replace all Indonesians with Chinese, who have an IQ of almost a full standard deviation higher, and you'll be OK to beat up Australia if they decide to bomb you for some reason. Other than that the problems are the same as Russia's: 95% of the human capital of Indonesia is dead weight and the remainder 3-5% is a local super ethnicity with a much higher than typical IQ and success in economy and politics. Which means, if it puts it mind to it, Indonesia can probably beat itself up, but isn't much of a threat to anyone else.

H/e in Russia all the smart Russians are leaving or locking themselves in fortresses in SPB and Moscow, while all the dumb Russians are becoming major bureaucrats in the feudal power structure, so maybe not lit. the same.

Chinese and Papuans/Balinese/whatever are actually distinct ethnic groups, for one, while Dumb Russians and Smart Russians aren't...yet?

[Purpelia]

>Literally a war with China
>Not really a topic for NSMRC

It's not a war unless people are shooting at you.

[Gallia-]

>Literally a war with China
>Not really a topic for NSMRC

It's not a war unless people are shooting at you.

Amazing.

[Purpelia]

It's not a war unless people are shooting at you.

Amazing.

Words have definitions, irregardless how you wish to ignore them.

[New Vihenia]

Well, trying to take this back to rail, even though I'm not sure this would be taken very seriously...

SO, regarding TNI (all, Army, Navy, Air Force), can anyone tell me, with very specific detail, about what reforms, equipment and weaponry purchases necessary to make it competent and competitive enough compared to Australia (only, not counting allies), Singapore, Vietnam and Malaysia? Or at least very good and sufficient for defense, or give anyone planning to invade bloodied nose or at least takes time to think about the worth and cost.

Cruise missiles and means to handle low RCS target. That is the most glaring problem in our armed service.

Cruise missile give us bargaining chips, while means to handle low RCS target will make anyone think before attacking.

[Austrasien]

What's with all this obsession about stopping China? Not only is it not really a topic for this thread but it is genuinely unhealthy for you. And aside from that, have you looked at the state of western civilization lately? Forced diversity, hate speech laws, economic stagnation and debt, america voting to elect between a reality TV star and a crazy globalist, the EU fragmenting as democracy and free speech are banned, OTAN being unable to do as much as stop Russia from annexing half of a nation that's on its border...

Eventually, you need to let Hegel go.

The west has many problems to fix before it can even contemplate challenging China. And the threat is not China rising up tomorrow to become a superpower but the west failing to recover at all and becoming a place not worth dominating for the Chinese.

It is the cause of 50% of those problems. There are only two real problems which together are the cause of the Wests global decline:

1. Sub-replacement fertility.
2. Deindustrialization.

Everything else either grows from those or is just latter-day Christology (AKA the least important thing Romans cared the most about). China has nothing to do with #1 and suffers from it too, but it is the main cause of #2. For the west to arrest its relative decline it needs to gain a larger share of manufacturing; since Chinese manufacturing is predominately for export to the west this can only come at their expense.

[Taihei Tengoku]

bad economics consultation thread

[Purpelia]

Except it really is not China. Or do you not remember that before China there was Japan and before Japan there were others. And even today China is not the only country taking western jobs, it's just the largest one.

The export of industry and jobs is entirely a product of globalism and globalist capitalism in the countries exporting said jobs. China and the others are just profiting off western stupidity. They are not predators hunting the nations of the west but vultures gnawing at the bones left over after its suicide.


TLDR: My problem with G is that he keeps yammering about fighting a trade war with China all the while failing to address or provide any actual solutions to the problems that got the west to where it is in the first place. And that to me is like standing on a soapbox in 1944 Germany shouting how all should band together to fight the Soviets.

[Gallia-]

do you not remember that before China there was Japan

>Japan
>Backed by the CIA
>Staunch democracy

The people complaining about China and people complaining about Japan were literally at the opposite ends of the age pyramid.

fighting a trade war

It's actually a war war. If China steals another graphics card from America (from itself???) we should escalate to de-escalate by destroying the 2nd Artillery Corps with B-2s and the Trident force. Then hold all Chinese hostage until they agree to annex themselves to America and sign away their sovereignty in perpetuity. Nuke a city until the defenseless Communist Party surrenders or is beheaded by people who do end up surrendering.

The best outcome rly.

Unf. the real outcome seems to be the USA withers away until it is about as economically and politically relevant as France or something.

[Austrasien]

bad economics consultation thread

When you follow "Good economic consultation".

Well for China perhaps.

[Gallia-]

Amazing.

Words have definitions, irregardless how you wish to ignore them.

Yeah and I'm using war correctly lmao. Unless you think WW2 started when Japan bombed America (and not, say, when Japan invaded China and got embargoed by America as a result, making WW2 the ultimate determined outcome (but such a Amero-Japanese war was visible on the horizon before the Great Depression even started rly). You could argue WW2 starts earlier (like 1905) since both Japan and America were expansionist Asian empires, though.

We all know the dictum of Clausewitz, one of the most famous writers on the philosophy and history of war, which says: “War is a continuation of policy by other means.”[4] This dictum comes from a writer[See Clausewitz, On War, Vol. 1] who reviewed the history of wars and drew philosophic lessons from it shortly after the period of the Napoleonic wars. This writer, whose basic views are now undoubtedly familiar to every thinking person, nearly eighty years ago challenged the ignorant man-in-the-street conception of war as being a thing apart from the policies of the governments and classes concerned, as being a simple attack that disturbs the peace, and is then followed by restoration of the peace thus disturbed, as much as to say: “They had a fight, then they made up!” This is a grossly ignorant view, one that was repudiated scores of years ago and is repudiated by any more or less careful analysis of any historical epoch of wars.

You don't even know your own rulebook TBH.

Armed conflict is as much as aspect of war as breathing is an aspect of living. It's a means to an end, not the end itself, and not the only means either. Both Lenin and Sun Tzu would consider the Chinese economic war being waged on the USA and West to be part skillful and part lucky. It's possible that the PRC could have been overtaken by India had India, since India is also a country of "like a billion plus poors" not decided to get in bed with Russia instead of someone rich like America, TBH. Whatever parts the PRC had no control over, it played them pretty well, and now it is reaping the benefit of being able to steer its policy for the past 40-something years towards the ultimate goal of destroying America, Russia, and becoming the king of the world I guess.

The last time the USA was actually good at playing the economic game was the 1970s. Then it sorta gave up. Maybe its IQ got too low to think that far ahead or maybe it was just eaten alive by rentiers I guess. The 1970s coincide with the USA becoming obsessed with the Middle East, the collapse of Bretton-Woods, and the end of Western economic hegemony, but before that the USA had enjoyed 150 years of skillful economic policy that guided it towards becoming the strongest economy in the world.

Now the PRC is doing the same thing except the PRC isn't really as nice as America TBH.

[Zhouran]

HDI as some smart person observed is really just a measure of how much like Scandinavia a country is. It doesn't really tell you anything useful except how well a state would fit into a hypothetical Greater Kalmar Union.

Every rich country and most not so rich countries have bad demographics these days. It says very little about relative capability. Gender imbalances don't really matter, people love this talking point because son preference makes white people uncomfortable and westerners are inclined to think everything they like is naturally superior, but the supposed catastrophes that will occur have never actually been seen, only theorized. Given modern young parsons in all advanced countries struggle to hook up even with normal gender balances and this does not cause the sky to fall it is hard to see why we should expect this to lead to anything other than more traffic for gelbooru - with so many "opting out" of relationships more or less voluntarily any notional shortage of partners who are willing and able approaches irrelevance. Poverty is a much bigger barrier (tfw can't even afford apartment in 3rd Tier city) for unmarried Chinese men seeking wives than "wife literally not born".

This is true of a lot of things. Political stability is a fuzzy concept and the arguments that China is "unstable" never amount to anything more than saying "China is a not a representative democracy" and therefore will collapse ANY DAY NOW. That the PRC has controlled China for roughly the same amount of time as the "stable, democratic" modern German, Italian and Japanese regimes and almost a decade longer than the French fifth republic is just a minor and unpleasant detail - Britain is very stable (forget about Scotland for a minute!) and as we know all western democracies are Britain and America. And that America is perfect obviously.

China has all sorts of problems but all states do; it is not how well a state stacks up against utopia that matters, but how it stacks up to other states that actually exist. And relative to other states China is gaining ground. Relative gain does not inherently imply absolute gain.

Mmmhhh... fair point. My concerns regarding China would be their demographics as well as the fragility of their government. The US has survived for a very long time, outliving both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. Regardless of anyone's opinions on the US government, the US is a politically stable nation, the same could be said with any western democracies such as Canada, Australia, etc. Plus, the US itself is wealthy, and regardless of the crimes and the lack of universal healthcare, America is a highly-developed nation. China on the other hand is still developing with Japan and South Korea having higher standard of living. The Chinese East Coast does rival both S.K. and Japan, but the rest of China is still developing with lower standards of living. I still have strong doubts on China being a "superpower" on the scale of the US, but even if it does become the "next superpower", the US wouldn't be going anywhere (the country might either become "slightly weak" or the nothing changes for the US apart from facing off against a second USSR).

J-20 and J-31 are literally F-22 and F-35. Their warships are comparable to American warships. The only place where they are truly inferior to the United States in naval technology is in carrier construction and submarines, and they are closing this gap rapidly. Their radars are poised to become the best in the world since the Western world literally cannot make radars anymore due to exporting to PRC of all its industry.

I would be surprised if their radars do become the "best" in the world, but the question is how did they get the experience and tech to produce something like AESA radars (apart from industrial espionage). The US and Western Europe are ahead of Russia in military electronics technology, and such tech would be pretty sensitive to export. The Chinese were supposed to have their J-8IIs fitted with APG-66(v) radars but the project later got cancelled and the Chinese most likely didn't receive the radars. Although, the Chinese did receive an AWG-9 radar from Iran and even though they did create the JL-10A based partially on the AWG-9, the Chinese couldn't fully reverse-engineer the AWG-9 due to technological limitations and lack of experience.

China has gone from being in the 1950s (MiG-21s and T-55s) to being in the 1990s in about the same amount of time it took the United States to do so. With the help of a handful of The Proper PDFs and some brochures. Meanwhile the United States Army has gotten worse equipment than it had in the 1990s and it is poised to receive very little in the way of new combat gear anyway because of twenty years of endless warfare and poor procurement decisions that resulted in producing nothing more than fodder for meme spies from places like Canada.

So while China's procurement has not only been successful but wildly so, the American procurement of war equipment has been slow and steady. This is not good when, if we can say, "technological change is speeding up". Of course that is a lie. The only thing that is changing is that the West cannot make things anymore, so its ability to buy new things probably takes twice as long as it would take an economically healthy civilization to do. Europe isn't even really worth mentioning since they're stuck somewhere in the 1970s in terms of procurement, and it seems like the next U.S. fighter aircraft might just be a repeat of F-35 or F-22 with slightly modernized components, much like Eurofighter is a repeat of F-15C.

How did American procurement of military equipment slowed down? The American defense budget would have decreased following the end of the Cold War, but didn't it increase since the War On Terror? The US military was testing a lot of new weapons during the 2000s, but sadly those experimental programs like XM29 OICW, XM2001 Crusader, and XM307 got cancelled.

Fortunately for mankind, the Chinese are probably not going to slow down. Unfortunately for all the not!Chinese living inside the Western world, the Chinese are not going to slow down.

The true unfortunate fact is that the ROC is the only good China: it is Western, liberal, and mostly civically nationalist (I think, a lot of China's alleged "civic nationalism" is really to thumb its nose at Taiwan). And it is a target for the China that is going to take over the world: despotic, illiberal, and ethnic nationalist. White men cannot be part of the Zhonghua minzu because they are barbarians who fought the Chinese, oppressed and humiliated them, and backed the corrupt Manchu empire for dozens of years. Like Japanese national identity, you're either a quaint and funny foreigner who is cute in the sense that you might find a dog shaking hands cute, but he isn't really Japanese, or you're a barbarian who cannot understand the true culture of your betters because you simply were not exposed to it from birth. Neither would anyone who attempts to become "Chinese" really be "Chinese" in a real sense to a lot of people. Millions of people, even. They wouldn't be able to understand China because China is something that you grow up in.

It's a bit like the United States in the 19th century where you were either "white", "an quad-/octoroon pretending to be white", or "a redman pretending to be white", or "target for elimination". You might be civilized. You might know the language really well. You might even be smart, the science is still out on that, but you're never going to be really white. You'll be a cute fixture for showing off the White Man's Burden and how it really does work to bring up savages to the apex of civilization. And if you aren't, you'll be expunged from society, restricted to reservations, and more or less eliminated. Just ask the Cheyenne or Pawnee how America is for them.

The difference is the United States, while never quite growing out of its ethnonationalism, has tried really hard to do so in the past century and a half. It took a million dead to get that far. It's unclear if the Chinese will do this because they are so early in formulating their ethnic identity and a lot of it really is based on blood, or at least some manner of appearance. You might come from a barbarian tribe like "European", you might become Hua, maybe your tribe accepted as part of the Zhonghua minzu itself, but you will always be Yi. The second you forget that you get sent to the labor camps to mine for the glory of the Communist Party. Your crime: You forgot you were a foreigner.

The USA and PRC are a lot in common, actually. They're both revolutionary states. They're both powerful industrial empires. They're both historically racialist. The difference is the United States has no background besides a common thread of equally unimportant and discarded wastrels arriving on its shores, making it their own, and getting accepted after decades of hard work that goes unnoticed and unacknowledged for multiple generations amidst major questions by the rest of accepted society. Then another group shows up. "American" doesn't require you to be steeped in it from birth because no one was born American except Native Americans, and they lost. OTOH, the PRC's ethnic identity is "Hua" followed by "pet tribes" of barbarians that were domesticated in conquest.

The Communist Party will tell you different of course but you can't really escape centuries of cultural inertia. And once it becomes King it cast off its cloak and revel in its true identity. First target: Australia? Possibly. No nukes, small military, and America won't defend them. Easier to grab than Siberia. Watch out lad, they might go all IJN on you guys and we'll be too weak and effete to stop them this time.

tl;dr Both the USA and PRC are historically aspects of ethnocentric civilizations. The United States is civic nationalist and the PRC is ethnic nationalist. An ethnic nationalist civilization owning the world is bad news for non-Chinese.

Eventually all of China will be red with a small holdout of Manchu slaves toiling in the bitcoin mines or something. Just like their flag.

So basically China becomes some sort of "empire reborn" hellbent on vengeance against the West for giving them a "Century of Humiliation"? The Chinese in general tend to have this odd relationship with the West: they hate the West for attacking the Qing Dynasty but at the same time they move to the West, study at Western universities, and then go on about how their country is better than the West. The Chinese probably have the biggest vengeance hateboner against the West out of all civilizations that clashed with Western empires.

As for Australia, the Chinese are having a field day with the Aussie real estate industry. They're buying properties just like what they're doing in Canada, and like in Canada, our government is selling out to the Chinese while the Chinese are buying up all the land they can buy.

[Western Pacific Territories]

1988's take on 2000.

"Marked by a low silhouette, supersensing radar arrays, and carrying remotely piloted surveillance aircraft, the ship of tomorrow will also incorporate mission-specific in the stern to accommodate amphibious assault teams, SEAL units or even X-wing fighters."

[Taihei Tengoku]

bad economics consultation thread

When you follow "Good economic consultation".

Well for China perhaps.

Largely explainable by solow factors and US dissaving rather than "free trade" vs "protectionism"

[Gallia-]

The Chinese in general tend to have this odd relationship with the West: they hate the West for attacking the Qing Dynasty but at the same time they move to the West, study at Western universities, and then go on about how their country is better than the West.

"Odd". They acknowledge that the West is richer, more developed, and has better science and technology than them. This is not eschewing the idea that China is superior, since China is actually superior (just look at the average IQs), but rather that the West has temporary and readily surmountable techno-economic lead. So they use the knowledge and wealth of the West against it, to destroy it, by learning what they can from us and applying it as a weapon. There is literally nothing odd about this it is the most basic thing that Leninism teaches.

You need to read more about hemp.

I would be surprised if their radars do become the "best" in the world, but the question is how did they get the experience and tech to produce something like AESA radars (apart from industrial espionage).

Do you think Chinese are stupid or something? They have a higher IQ than the West. It's literally maths. Anyone can make an AESA. It's not hard to make the best AESAs when you're the only game in town, since the West isn't going ot be making any new radars in a few decades once its average IQ hits about 90 or so. Too few good engineers focused on too many projects to invest in large sums of military equipment rather than merely "keeping the lights on" for the 400 million IQ 90 Westerners TBH.

How do you get experience? How do you think? You work by doing. The Chinese actually make radars. The West stopped making radars decades ago. The most advanced Western radars are 30 years old. The most common ones are 50. Find me a new American tactical fighter radar that isn't putting lipstick on a sow. All the various upgrades for the old radars are sort of meaningless since the only actually new tactical radars the USA has made for fighter jets are the APG-81 and APG-77. The APG-63 upgrades and whatever that followed leveraged its technology or its ideas, or both, but they're not really new radars either because radars and fighter jets are somewhat inseparable.

If you're going to be surprised that Chinese make the best weapons in 10-20 years then I can only assume you are also surprised when you eat breakfast next Tuesday because that's about as shocking and dramatic as the PRC getting swole.

The US and Western Europe are ahead of Russia in military electronics technology, and such tech would be pretty sensitive to export.

ITAR is notoriously successful after all.

the Chinese couldn't fully reverse-engineer the AWG-9 due to technological limitations and lack of experience.

China doesn't want a shitty 1970s radar. It has 1990s radars instead. Since the USA hasn't made a new radar in 30 years it's perfectly

How did American procurement of military equipment slowed down?

America got stupid? America took a break and lost the lead? America thought (thinks!) the war is over? How do you think? When you pull the rug out of two dozen thousand contractors to the point that they all shrivel up, consolidate, and destroy any sense of diversity and idea pluralism in favor of monoliths and monopolies/"sole-source contractors", you create massive incentives that push people towards abusing the system. Lockheed-Martin has a monopoly on American fighter jets. Boeing has a monopoly on American trainers. Northrop-Grumman has a monopoly on American strategic bombers.

These companies face zero competition in their respective fields because they are highly specialized in each one and because their competition itself slowly decayed over time. Break up the defense contractors into their constituents, hand them a whole grip of deficit spending, and you might be able to save some of them from bankruptcy and liquidation. At the very least you'd end up with a couple manufacturers of main battle tanks, a couple mfg of small arms, a couple mfg of tactical fighters, etc.

The entire US MIC is a hard learned lesson in the perils of ill-thought out defense spending draw downs. Maybe if America were actually sane and knew that war does not end just because the last war stopped because the other guys surrendered, then it might be able to make a rational and not at all myopic decision on how to cut down its spending, but it can't. It'll win the next Korea and that'll be the last gasp for democracy for a couple human lifetimes probably.

The best option would have been to cut down U.S. defense spending in the 1990s at a very slow rate, not only to preserve MIC companies by allowing them time to downsize, but also to afford the passing out "feeder" contracts to subsidize them so their knowledge pools and the general institutional diversity could be retained. Since, as you are well aware, diversity is strength, it is bad to have one organization that simply vomits fighter jets out its mouth and another that vomits bombers and another that spits out tankers, etc. Which is what the U.S. has. It went from a system of essentially diverse and open market to a system resembling Russia or France with "fighter jet national champion" and "bomber jet national champion" and "armored vehicle national champion" etc.

But smart/good options are generally off the table for winning elections. Les Aspin saying "There's about twice as many company presidents here that I want to see next quarter," to the collective U.S. MIC is better for votes.

That way when America needs them again, the private corporations of McDonnell Douglas, Boeing, Lockheed, Martin Marietta, Grumman, Northrop, Rockwell, Textron, Cadillac Gage, FMC Corporation, and General Dynamics will be there. Instead of, well, Boeing, Lockheed-Martin, Northrop Grumman, BAE, and GD, because cutting your diversity and institutions in half is always a good idea. Except it wasn't in half. It was more like "kill 90%" and all the engineers and good management cultures were replaced by a handful of bad management cultures (McDonnell Douglas/Boeing, I'm looking at you) that only exaggerated their badness because it went from being 2% of the MIC to 20%.

Good job America. But hey, there's no more wars now, so why bother investing in defense? Just ignore...Korea...WW2...Vietnam...Desert Storm...China. eace Dividend:

The American defense budget would have decreased following the end of the Cold War, but didn't it increase since the War On Terror?

Because you need highly advanced radars and super fighter jets to bomb a bunch of brown people. The U.S. military is running on inertia from the Cold War.

The US military was testing a lot of new weapons during the 2000s, but sadly those experimental programs like XM29 OICW, XM2001 Crusader, and XM307 got cancelled.

The only relevant thing you mentioned was XM2001. Which is incidentally one area where Russia is more advanced than the USA: field artillery.

As for Australia, the Chinese are having a field day with the Aussie real estate industry. They're buying properties just like what they're doing in Canada, and like in Canada, our government is selling out to the Chinese while the Chinese are buying up all the land they can buy.

The future of the West truly. Except this time they share few values in common. Just look at how relevant and how totally not dominated culturally, politically, and economically by America the Western Europeans are. Now apply that same sort of dominance to reeducation through labor, systematic and scientific oppression of political thought, and centralized control of economics. The future of the some parts of the Western world (read: Canada and Australia, possibly others) will likely resemble the Soviet Union more than the modern West. Not out of ill will or deliberate campaigning by the Chinese, but because the Australians and Canadians will come to accept the "Chinese solutions" as reasonable ones, as they've accepted the American solutions as reasonable ones.

Autocracy and repression are in vogue in the future. You'll be living in one. Better hope you never dissent or else you might get sent to a copper mine.

[The Manticoran Empire]

bad economics consultation thread

When you follow "Good economic consultation".

Well for China perhaps.

Actually, China is lying about it's GDP growth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrpAZ5qHSlU