Sounds crazy, I know, but I think Xi-fans should at least consider the flaws of China's "Do nothing, win" strategy, and how it may paradoxically still lead to its undoing.
The US bourgeoisie knows it can't beat China in head-on conventional warfare. So, it doesn't.
Porky has put a lot of effort since the Vietnam War to avoid making Amerikkkans feels the impacts of US wars of aggression to great success. Despite the amount of conflicts the US is involved in as we speak, anti-war sentiment is negligable. There was nothing like the anti-war movement during Vietnam, which by itself wasn't even strong enough to end the war either. It was the Vietnamese who militarily defeated the US that ended the war.
Amerikkkan reliance on proxies and mercs is the key to maintain the Empire. If they can make China's neighbours fight them in their stead, they they can win, and have East Asia plundered, like they have plundered Eastern Europe since the 90s, to give capitalism another 50 years.
China has failed to counter this problem completely, letting country after country on their borders fall into US hands in recent years. Once friendly countries turned into enemies.
China's rebranded 'socialism in one country' strategy isn't enough to resist US aggression. The US doen't need to do much to blockade Chinese shipping, and block all imports from entering the mainland. Going from "random" drone boats sent from US vallal states, to airstrikes and piracy conducted by US forces themselves, which they have been training for through the recent attacks on Russian and Venezuelan ships.
China can't retaliate against this adequately, due to their lack of bases or proxies of their own around Amerikkkan territory.
China's complete neglegt of this danger may be its downfall. For all their greatness, they cannot last against a neval blockade, land siege and hybrid warfare, the US has been preparing for.
This is why solidarity is so important. Supporting comrades in other countries isn't about kindness. It ensures you will not be attacked by brothers turned against you.
Meanwhile, the global bourgeoisie has shown extreme amounts of solidarity amongst themselves, to great effectiveness. They are very unified, especially compared to the 1910s, unlike us.
54 posts and 4 image replies omitted.>>2617404>and ensuring the PLA is modern and ready.For what?
Bumping since its a bit more relevant right now
>>2623387>Zero days since Chinese betrayalYeah, I hate being proven correct. Fuck this timeline! Mark my words, Chinese passivity will be its downfall.
>The US bourgeoisie knows it can't beat China in head-on conventional warfare. So, it doesn't.
They can.
Handily, even. China is a paper tiger.
The only thing stopping that from happening is that different bourg factions won't accept the cost and have enough pull to avoid confrontation that would affect their bottom line (for now).
With Russia, the bourgs who still had something to lose with a confrontation with cucktin straight out lost against the other factions.
>>2623589>The US can beat China in conventional armed controntationChina can
<produce more shells<more bombs<drones<has numbers advantage in everything but naval warfare, which will change soon also???
Delusional post.
>>2623604This is cope.
The US has already all of that shit that china """can produce""" (how fast? who will operate it? what's the overall quality of the materiel and operators? how readily can it be fielded effectively) ready for use and in active deployment. In better quality too in every single sense of the word.
>>2623589thats what i think. its not a question of "the US cant beat china", they can, easily, but theres too much at stake, and it would be an ugly victory, unlike any other war the US has fought.
theyve never fought an equal country since 1776
>>2623615>how fast? who will operate it? what's the overall quality of the materiel and operators? how readily can it be fielded effectivelyMilitary personnel, where China has the numbres advantage by far.
What are you smoking?
>>2623589>>2623615The U.S. Military Relies on One Louisiana Factory. It Blew Up.
>>2625595China's whole thing is that it's non-interventionist. Why does this still surprise people?
>>2626125It needs to ramp up local interventionism soon.
>>2625595The red pill is that china is ultraleft - they're not going to intervene to help out a bourgeois state.
Why participate in inter-bourgeois intrigue?
>>2615571>So? That has absolutely zero bearing on whether or not they're on the path to communismThis is actually the most important thing for communism. Establishing communism becomes far more trivial if technology advances enough to create post-scarcity conditions
>>2613865Well we all know about the encirclement strategy, it's very openly the US plan. But I don't see how global socialism and interventionism would have helped this, considering how closely countries like Japan are bound to the US, in fact a more aggressive stance would just be propagandized into Chinese imperialist expansionism and make people in neighboring countries more supportive of the US.
I don't think the island chains encirclement thing is going to be enough for a defeat, especially since it relies on, you know, islands, which are far more import reliant than China and extremely vulnerable to disabling of port infrastructure. Indeed, they might not even need that, simple sanctions might be enough - for example, with the aforementioned Japan, much of their economy depends on Chinese tourism and consumption, along with much of their imports, including materials and components important for their industry(and thus the rest of their economy). So if China takes a big hit to the economy from a blockade, Japan gets hit twice as hard. Adding to this, that China is Japan's second largest source of food imports, so they'll have a significant increase in food prices amidst a collapsing economy. I think something similar happens to South Korea, assuming North Korea doesn't join in and crush them immediately by flattening Seoul(where half the population lives) with rocket artillery. Phillipines is probably more independent but they're also way weaker and less developed so China can easily destroy their defenses and then their ports.
As for piracy, the armed container ship that was recently flaunted may have something to do with that(vidrel). Though VLS cells are rather overkill, just equipping every ship with some sort of autocannon is enough to destroy drone boats and force out more expensive missiles for piracy - munitions the US can't spare during a full on war with China. Assuming they can't arm a significant number of merchant ships for some reason, they won't be able to retaliate proportionally due to America having more proxies around the globe, but if America just does gray zone piracy without entering open war, then they won't be able to attack more than a handful of ships through proxies since too much provocation would cause China to begin open warfare. So it's not really going to cut off China, just increase shipping insurance costs. Though tbh the first pirate attack might trigger the war, since unlike Venezuela China isn't an extreme underdog. And with the Ukrainian attacks on Russian shipping, there's not really anything more the Russians can to do escalate considering they're already invading Ukraine, the problem there is just Russian Black Sea Fleet being so incompetent that they can't even destroy simple kamikaze speedboats.
I'm not a Chinaboo - well I am in the sense that I think it's a fascinating country, but I'm not a huge fan of Xi - but I don't think the US has an interest in sabotaging Chinese exports. American manufacturing hasn't recovered from 1980s neoliberalism and outsourcing, to the point where the US asked South Korean companies recently to come open factories there to give jobs to Americans and get some sort of productive capacities they cannot produce themselves (the deal was terrible for Koreans so it fell through).
The US is extremely dependent on Chinese manufacturers, and Trump can increase tariffs all he wants, as long as the US don't have a public investment plan to change the situation, it won't change.
On the other hand, China is also dependent on the US (and EU) because they are the main consumers of their exports. China is not a perfect country, despite what some people might say here. Wages are relatively low there, and their domestic consumers can't absorb the glut of commodities they produce, nor less rich countries. There is a reason the Chinese central bank keep the monetary value of the renminbi below the USD, to facilitate exports.
Also if the neighbors of China don't like it, it's because their foreign policies toward their neighbors is not optimal. Vietnam, funnily enough has not many problems with the US (they won the war after all), but the Vietnamese don't like China, notably due to the territorial conflict over islands, and because they feel China want to colonize them. And not every one is happy that communists won in Vietnam, notably in the South.
That said, the South Korean president is in Beijing as I write this post to meet with Xi, because, their respective economies are very interwhined (and also to discuss North Korea), so there is a need for all of them to stay in peaceful terms, even if SK is aligned with the US.
One thing though, is that China has no experience in modern warfare, unlike the US. But I think the economy is too globalized as of now for a real military conflict between China and potential US proxies to happen. The US can bully poorer countries like Venezuela but China is a way much more important actor in the world economy for this to happen.
These bizarre China projection threads…
The biggest problem facing China right now is the housing bubble. It's being managed, but that's the main issue.
>>2615571UH YOU'RE A LEFTCOM CUCK SHUT UP FUCK YOU FUCKIN NEOCON TROT CUCK LOL
>>2626904China won’t be affected by a cutting of trade ties to the same degree though. The US and Europe and Japan and Australia and etc would lose the supply of the actual commodities, which they could not replace in a short enough timeframe even if they immediately poured all their money into manufacturing and built factories as quickly as possible with complete competence. Meanwhile China loses supply of… fiat currency, which can be resolved by simply completely cutting the connection to the Western economic system and restructuring the economy to be closer to a command economy, which it can do more easily than any other major state because of the complete state control over banking alongside state ownership of more than half of the market.
>>2628312>Meanwhile China loses supply of… fiat currency, which can be resolved by simply completely cutting the connection to the Western economic system and restructuring the economy to be closer to a command economyLol, I'm sorry but this is like a burgeristani telling us on /pol/ "we just need to build more factories and we can then be independent from China" yet they don't.
Face it, both poles have deep interwinted links when it comes to actual commodity production and selling them. China gets a lot of money from this state of affairs and have no interest in ending it soon.
>>2625595Deng won. China won. Communism won.
>>2628523Obviously China isn’t just going to cut all trade ties right now, it would pointlessly sacrifice its current industrial stranglehold on the world where it undercuts Western industry by being cheaper. If it starts trying to decouple now, American capital would be forced to actually start building their own industry where they are currently unable to due to being so profit-motivated. However, in the event of open warfare, China is going to get sanctioned and its foreign assets seized anyway, so it might as well just bite the bullet and decouple everything, probably by putting the currency on gold standard like Russia did, seizing foreign assets for the state as well as nationalizing some private holdings and moving people who lost their jobs in Western-oriented export industries to state-owned military industries, shifting into a war economy like Russia.
None of this is necessarily going to happen though - open warfare isn’t needed for China if it can continue expanding its power in peacetime while US power declines. So even if the PRC can take the hit of decoupling better than the US(producer vs consumer is very much not an equal relation) there’s no reason to make big moves when staying the course isn’t a bad trajectory. They might make moves on Taiwan though, there’s a good chance the US just does nothing about that once the military disparity increases even more.
>>2613865someone redraw this as BRICS tearing up America
>>2630593….America tearing up Venezuela (and Iran. and Gaza. soon everyone except the DPRK with the only formal alliance with China) as China sits in the cuck chair
>>2613865https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_private_wealthYou're overthinking it. The USA has vast reserves of private wealth it could tap into and easily stomp China with. It's just a political choice to have a grossly inefficient "free economy". The USA was built off a mixed/war economy and Trump just nationalised U.S. Steel and Intel a bit ago.
>>2631594That's bold to say easily
>>2631594>Figures in this article only cover household wealth, and exclude government wealth, which may be substantial, as in China, or negative, as in the UK or US, and so do not show total wealth.Though either way their "wealth" is irrelevant as it cannot transform into industry and tangible military assets quickly enough. I think I've said this before, even if they poured ALL their investments into actual industry instead of AI datacenters RIGHT NOW, and didn't have any comically long delays typical of American construction, it would still take at least a decade to plan and build everything. And in no foreseeable future are they going to replicate the Chinese full-spectrum supply chain from mining to refining to components to final assembly. If the US enters a war economy, so will China, and while the war will be devastating nothing in NATO is going to stop a militarized China putting a significant fraction of its industry towards war production.
>>2631622You're overthinking it. They don't need a decade of Nazi Germany to re-industrialize they'll just buy out the colonies they already have. It's really not hard to bribe a few politicians to create more special economic zones in the periphery and fly in slave workers from Africa.
>>2632241It is hard when China has wealth and actual valuable trade. Also who can the US buyout at this point?Argentina is still forced to trade with China for one of too many examples
>>2632327>It is hardIt's not. Its basic imperialism and the US is the top dog and has been for some time.
>who can the US buyout at this point?Argentina is still forced to trade with China for one of too many examplesAny industrialized western country, majority if not all of the of the OECD, etc.
>Argentina Bizarre example. How about France, Canada, Japan, ROK, western Europe, EU in general, of who bend over backwards to satisfy every US geostrategic/economic demand and who have education systems that outperform the US generally?
And yes Argentina is on a difficult path for the US neo-mercantilist turn now that the center-left, BRICS and sovreignty was rejected and Second Monroe Doctrine has just materialized…
>>2632241But as I mentioned, stuff like new refineries and factories would take at least 10 years to build, while China already dominates global refining for most of the world’s metals. If they pour resources into developing industry, they will lose even faster militarily.
>>2632726>Any industrialized western country, majority if not all of the of the OECD, etc.North Korea singlehandedly outproduces all of NATO artillery production, lol
SCO? A bluff.
>>2615571The People's Republic of China is a successful implementation of Fascism, and it's a good thing.
ᴉuᴉlossnW was a dumb cuck who didn't know what they were doing and was dominated by the bourgeois squadrismo. So do not glorify their idiocy. Contrast their movement against the peasant revolution in China.
But the simple truth is that a socialist mode of production cannot be formed by any significant component of the capitalist machine without the entire machine being dominated. This necessitates a transition state, which has so-far invariably been nationalist class-collaboration, practically indistinguishable from a successful implementation of progressive Fascism to safeguard the revolution from bourgeois dominance, liberalist regression and international dominance by uncontrolled foreign capital. China is a ''corpus'. That's why there are five stars on the flag. That's why the corporatist National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference exists. That's why China has billionaires and the capacity to execute them.
inb4 left-communists crying because they have no idea what Fascism is and don't want their favorite country to be associated with a dirtied word
>>2651447>inb4 left-communists cryingMaoists are Stalinists buddy. You're throwing big terms around, while role playing as a bookworm.
Kinda cringe.
>>2651447>ᴉuᴉlossnW was a dumb cuck who didn't know what they were doing and was dominated by the bourgeois bourgeois domination is fascism working as intended
>which has so-far invariably been nationalist class-collaboration>That's why China has billionaires and the capacity to execute them.look theyre collaborating!
>>2651447stop posting on /leftypol/ bombacci
>>2651447unironically this is how historical fascists (italian fascists) viewed themselves.
>>2613865trvke: WW3 HAS ALREADY STARTED WITH NATO'S ATTEMPTED INVASION OF RUSSIA
>>2651496i look like this and i love fascism
Unique IPs: 31