The clash of civilizations | The new global axis of power?

[Typhoon]

Well, let's put this really rich spengler interview here:

https://www.asiatimes.com/2019/10/artic ... -spengler/

Read the sweet smelling lavender-storm in the disqus comments. It's hilarious..............

wow, layers of turdlets all composting away.

Spenglers rants on China are a tad orientalist nonsense, in his usual provocative manner of mixing some ideas with crass stereotypes.

the rants in the comment section they triggered, are gold.

Still, I think his primary idea wasnt that provocative, the Chinese want the same setup the Americans currently have, collecting rent from the rest of the world for providing the market system.

debatable how much the rest of the world trusts them for such a thing, then again, its not like America is maintaining particularly high fiscal standards anymore either.

On the flipside, its not like they can do worse than the west did in Africa, South America particularly, tho betting the future on those guys getting their lavender together, seems at this stage, a brave move.

Well, with PR China the US is facing a competitor on all fronts for the first time since the start of the postwar era.

Soviet Russia was a military competitor and an ideological competitor in the Turd World, er, Third World and in the halls of academia, mostly the humanities, in the West, but was never an economic competitor.

Japan was an economic competitor before the bubble burst, but never a military or ideological competitor.

The recent kowtowing by Western corporations and institutions to PR China sensibilities is instructive.

On the other hand, Pooh for Life Xi Jinping is 66. Young by current American standards, but he too is not forever. Poohs for Life have a history of not grooming a successor leading to an often ruinous power struggle after their demise. One wonders what will happen in China after he is gone.

Anyways, I would argue that one intangible that is key for future success is confidence, especially confidence in the future.
Best expressed by another [dead] white guy.

KNQRqJitqNI

The self-flagellation currently in vogue among the chattering classes of the West seems to me to be the opposite of energy and confidence.

[Doc]

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/20 ... s-us-biowe

Russia and China flood web with coronavirus outbreak lies blaming U.S.; State Dept. fights back

State Department combats China's attempt to reshape narrative, blame Washington

[noddy]

https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/05/14/ch ... ecoupling/

The U.S. ambassador on the spot in an Asian economic powerhouse put it bluntly in a cable to the secretary of state in Washington: Don’t cut them off. Give them some “economic elbow-room,” or they’ll be forced to carve out an economic empire of their own by force. But Washington was in the grip of economic nationalists battling a historic economic downturn. The White House, consequently, was deaf to the Ambassador Joseph Grew’s pleas from Tokyo in 1935.

Within a few years, the United States ramped up economic pressure on Japan, culminating in a trade and oil embargo. Six years after Grew wrote his dispatch, the two countries were engaged in total war.

Today, American policymakers are consumed by the economic and geopolitical confrontation with another Asian heavyweight. And, as in the 1930s, economic decoupling is all the rage.

[Typhoon]

https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/05/14/ch ... ecoupling/

The U.S. ambassador on the spot in an Asian economic powerhouse put it bluntly in a cable to the secretary of state in Washington: Don’t cut them off. Give them some “economic elbow-room,” or they’ll be forced to carve out an economic empire of their own by force. But Washington was in the grip of economic nationalists battling a historic economic downturn. The White House, consequently, was deaf to the Ambassador Joseph Grew’s pleas from Tokyo in 1935.

Within a few years, the United States ramped up economic pressure on Japan, culminating in a trade and oil embargo. Six years after Grew wrote his dispatch, the two countries were engaged in total war.

Today, American policymakers are consumed by the economic and geopolitical confrontation with another Asian heavyweight. And, as in the 1930s, economic decoupling is all the rage.

The trade and oil embargo against Imperial Japan was due to the phenomenally effective China Lobby of the wholly corrupt Chiang Kai-shek - Soong Mei-ling nationalist gang. The goal of this gang was to have the US enter into the civil war between the nationalists and communists on the nationalists side to get rid of Mao Tse-tung and his gang.

The US chattering classes, notably the US State Dept and the MSM, of the time were very sympathetic having been lead to believe by ministers and missionaries that mainland China was "thirsting for Christianity". The Soong family made their fortune in the US printing bibles for China.

Given the specifics of the situations, I don't think that the analogy is a very good one.

[Doc]

https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/05/14/ch ... ecoupling/

The U.S. ambassador on the spot in an Asian economic powerhouse put it bluntly in a cable to the secretary of state in Washington: Don’t cut them off. Give them some “economic elbow-room,” or they’ll be forced to carve out an economic empire of their own by force. But Washington was in the grip of economic nationalists battling a historic economic downturn. The White House, consequently, was deaf to the Ambassador Joseph Grew’s pleas from Tokyo in 1935.

Within a few years, the United States ramped up economic pressure on Japan, culminating in a trade and oil embargo. Six years after Grew wrote his dispatch, the two countries were engaged in total war.

Today, American policymakers are consumed by the economic and geopolitical confrontation with another Asian heavyweight. And, as in the 1930s, economic decoupling is all the rage.

The trade and oil embargo against Imperial Japan was due to the phenomenally effective China Lobby of the wholly corrupt Chiang Kai-shek - Soong Mei-ling nationalist gang. The goal of this gang was to have the US enter into the civil war between the nationalists and communists on the nationalists side to get rid of Mao Tse-tung and his gang.

The US chattering classes, notably the US State Dept and the MSM, of the time were very sympathetic having been lead to believe by ministers and missionaries that mainland China was "thirsting for Christianity". The Soong family made their fortune in the US printing bibles for China.

Given the specifics of the situations, I don't think that the analogy is a very good one.

Roosevelt wanted to be president of the world. He intended to do that through entering the world war. He wanted Japan to attack pearl harbor IN his presidential papers. In conversations with former Secretary of War Stimson released in 2001 they both hinted at Japan attacking pearl harbor weeks before the attack. Roosevelt knew the other way to get th eAmerican people behind entering the war was a sneak attack. Hitler had no particular desire to fight the US. He only agreed to the joint defense pact with Japan in the hope that Japan would attack Russia. Thus taking the pressure off of German forces in the Soviet Unnion.

But Japan saw its enemy as the US in the pacific, while the forces of the Soviet Union were far away in Europe. So they did not attack. Roosevelt sent 500,000 troops to the pacific and 5 million to Europe. Defeating Japan alone would not make Roosevelt president of the world.

AS for Chinese propaganda. What there was of that was highly ineffective. Minnie Vautrin in fact committed suicide thinking herself a failure because she saw that getting the US involved in the war was getting no where. Americans had absolutely no interest in getting involved in yet another world war only 20 some years after the previous world war.

This article is from 1996 but largely gets it right.

https://reason.com/1976/02/01/fdrs-wate ... rl-harbor/

[noddy]

Obviously its more a of history rhymes, not repeats kind of thing - but the main point I think is that the theory of MAD stopping hot conflict between nuclear powers is certainly going to be tested over the next decade now that economic depression and trade wars are garunteed.

the worst thing that could possibly happen is an agreement to ban nukes - several countries would be jumping at the opportunity to offload some angry masses who have no future.

[noddy]

https://power.lowyinstitute.org/countries/australia/

current power rankings in asia, as per some australian think tank.

[Nonc Hilaire]

https://power.lowyinstitute.org/countries/australia/

current power rankings in asia, as per some australian think tank.

Surprised Australians don’t have some clever slang for ‘think tank’.

[Simple Minded]

https://power.lowyinstitute.org/countries/australia/

current power rankings in asia, as per some australian think tank.

Surprised Australians don’t have some clever slang for ‘think tank’.

Now that I'm over the shock of Australians actually having a "think tank," I wanna know how much water or beer it could hold.

I'm also curious as to the demographic makeup. What percentage are African Americans, Gays, Trans-fat, etc.

How does one actually get into a think tank anyway? Is it like getting invited to a pool party? Is swim wear required or cam one go au-nature-ale?

[Doc]

https://power.lowyinstitute.org/countries/australia/

current power rankings in asia, as per some australian think tank.

Surprised Australians don’t have some clever slang for ‘think tank’.

Now that I'm over the shock of Australians actually having a "think tank," I wanna know how much water or beer it could hold.

I'm also curious as to the demographic makeup. What percentage are African Americans, Gays, Trans-fat, etc.

How does one actually get into a think tank anyway? Is it like getting invited to a pool party? Is swim wear required or cam one go au-nature-ale?

I suppose you have to think your way in with raw brain power.

[Typhoon]

https://power.lowyinstitute.org/countries/australia/

current power rankings in asia, as per some australian think tank.

Surprised Australians don’t have some clever slang for ‘think tank’.

Now that I'm over the shock of Australians actually having a "think tank," I wanna know how much water or beer it could hold.

I'm also curious as to the demographic makeup. What percentage are African Americans, Gays, Trans-fat, etc.

How does one actually get into a think tank anyway? Is it like getting invited to a pool party? Is swim wear required or cam one go au-nature-ale?

I suppose you have to think your way in with raw brain power.

If only.

[Typhoon]

Taki's Mag - Z Man | Reality always wins

From a certain distance you cannot help but look at this and see that the universe has a sense of humor.

One of the many excellent uses of reality is that it can be used to test ideological and political theories. No matter how good the idea seems in the lab, the only way to know if it will work is to give it a go in the real world. The best example of this is the seventy-year social experiment called communism. The acolytes of Karl Marx tried to prove that the human condition was nothing more than a social construct.

Granted, reality can be a cruel master. No one really knows how many people Stalin murdered while getting the experiment going. The best guess is tens of millions died under Soviet communism. Then you have the Asian experience. The Black Book of Communism puts the number at 94 million. It is a good reminder that reality can remain stubborn longer than the ideologues can pile corpses.

It looks like the rulers of the Global American Empire are ready to put their favored ideology to the test in the real world. Multiculturalism is pretty much a religion with the ruling classes, despite the fact that most of them live like white nationalists. For them, “diversity is our strength” is not just a marketing slogan. They really think that diversity in all of its forms is the key to creating a global paradise.

So much so, in fact, that the United States military is making diversity its No. 1 priority up and down the chain of command. Pedro Gonzalez reports in Chronicles that Bishop Garrison, senior adviser to the Secretary of Defense, is pushing ahead with Critical Race Theory and a Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity program to make the military the most diverse institution on earth. They will be the rainbow warriors of the glorious future, comrades! . . .

[Mr. Perfect]

If Romney had won, we'd likely be in a shooting war with Russia and all of the Armageddon talk would be that much closer. The dick-waving has been bad enough with President Punchy and SecState Babbleboy. They may yet double down on bad strategy ( pushing NATO to the Russian border) and get us all killed, but at least at heart, they are kinda chickenshit enough to be predisposed against doing anything difficult.

Unlike Romney or McCain. They have a proven track record of not giving a damn about the strategic realities and being willing to fight to the last guy-that-isn't-them. This is one time where I have to shake my head that the nation is faring better under an incompetent dolt than an incompetent EVIL dolt.

And yes, Virginia, it is evil to start wars of aggression where you have no business being.

Aged poorly. From memory he had lost his mind at this point.

[Mr. Perfect]

An economic hissyfit between the US and Russia would be the largest failure of the President's foreign policy, even if the situation generated more heat than light- his whole policy seemed to cater to including Russia to an extent...unusual...for America. From the push of the reset button, I thought President Obama was taking some generally good moves in this direction; some things to positively point to in his administration.

So where did this go wrong?

Was it placing Kerry in as Secretary of State. Clinton could do plenty of stupid things, but I don't remember her folding like FrankenKerry here. Every time he opens his mouth, we seem to have some sort of diplomatic gaffe, lose ground, or end up in a position we don't really want to be in.

It's the only change I can see explaining why we went from thoughtful and conservative maneuvering with Moscow to game after game of 52 card pick up.

From a "Republican"

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

An economic hissyfit between the US and Russia would be the largest failure of the President's foreign policy, even if the situation generated more heat than light- his whole policy seemed to cater to including Russia to an extent...unusual...for America. From the push of the reset button, I thought President Obama was taking some generally good moves in this direction; some things to positively point to in his administration.

So where did this go wrong?

Was it placing Kerry in as Secretary of State. Clinton could do plenty of stupid things, but I don't remember her folding like FrankenKerry here. Every time he opens his mouth, we seem to have some sort of diplomatic gaffe, lose ground, or end up in a position we don't really want to be in.

It's the only change I can see explaining why we went from thoughtful and conservative maneuvering with Moscow to game after game of 52 card pick up.

From a "Republican"

yes, from a Republican 8 years ago.

I still advocate for a world where Russia is included and would praise those efforts by anyone,

What is clearer now which was just coming to light then was the obscene amount money laundering our political class does in eastern europe; and maybe more importantly, that we have approximately zero people in our bureaucracy or government who aren't obsessed with Russia, many for very bat-$hit crazy reasons and prejudices.

Those obsessions may seem justified in light of the ugliness of Russian nationalism and that will be the lesson imposed, but that is the wrong one in my opinion.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.

Losing Ibrahim was a big loss for fora

unfortunately