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.
>>2613865I'd trust you but I saw a lot of Indian users with the socialist flag so I won't
>>2613865>the flaws of China's "Do nothing, win" strategyYou moron even started a shitty thread. Incredible.
All was answered in /PRC/:
>>2613887westoids have no shame, whatsoever
An under discussed topic of the BRI is how it dollarizes the economies of the developing countries. And China's over production deciminates the local industries leaving an open all you can eat buffet for American finance capital to harvest from third world countries (and now Europe).
The problem is looking at the world as only two competing giants instead of which regions these two can form power centers in and I dont think China is going to have much influence against America's 7 headed hydra like financial system.
>>2613888Is a common strategy for some of the worst posters on the site, they loose an argument (in spectacular fashion often) And so go to make an OP reiterating the argument and/or seething about loosing the argument.
>>2613886Damnit. Those bloody raiders stealing MY flag! >:(
>>2613903I wasn't even in that thread.
>>2613911I typed this myself, thank you very much. Nobody has addressed my criticisms that China is just letting the US surround it with basically no resistance, ignoring the real danger of a future blackade.
Also, AI wouldn't tell you to kys, motherfucker!
>>2614065>Nobody has addressed my criticismsMeanwhile, in reality:
>>2613888Kys, undereducated willing shill of NAFO
>>2614070Literally hasn't addressed anything. Just calling me "undereducated" without elaboration, isn't helpful.
>NAFOI'm not one of the raiders, dipshit!
Shit, why was my name removed?>>2614115
China is eternal and undying.
>>2613865>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.I dislike china but this is moronic, china gets like 40% of its oil domestically now and for the rest they can just build a pipeline from Russia. The time for blockading china from oil is sliping away
>>2614285>I dislike china but this is moronicI dislike you but you are an anti-communist, manifest, tbh.
>>2614172Okay but "China does a million things" doesn't actually address anything. What specific things is China doing to avoid the scenario in the OP?
why do tankies worship china
>>2614350Why do anarchists worship repeated failure?
>>2614355Exactly, this we like successful revolutionaries like freidrich ebert instead of faildaughters like luxemburg here
>>2613865China will collapse from global climate mismanagement and lack of sufficient revolutionary development. America may utilize proxies and mercs extensively to counter Chinese influence, but there is a high chance the country falls apart before it can see its plots to fruition.
>>2615243
I would not seriously factoring in current or future arable land developments in that manner. The release of land from Arctic conditions will be a chaotic and catastrophic affair that will take a minimum of a century to deal with. The released land would consist of a great deal of rocks, swamps, gravel/sand filled soil, and melted ice (water). The communities, infrastructure, and local ecosystems will of course be devastated by all of this. And let's not forget the extreme changes in weather and temperature that will occur, along with potential increases in pollution from devastated areas of civilization across the planet.
I would seriously bet on civilizations that invests heavily in sealed, indoor, climate controlled agriculture would be the breadbaskets of the world while everyone else, for the most part, is getting mad max levels of nutrition (if even that).
>>2614327>>2614355Materially, China is fascist. The class antagonism between bourgeois and proletariat still exists, they've just added another layer of control on top of it. Instead of a proletariat being opressed by the ruling bourgeois, they have a proletariat oppressed by the bourgeois who are oppressed by the CPC. They have not meaningfully solved the problem of capitalism, but instead obfuscated it.
>inb4 the CPC says it's communistAnyone can say anything. Do you believe goth kids when they tell you they're werewolves? You have a brain and five perfectly good senses, what's it going to take for you to actually use them?
>inb4 the CPC is ideologically committed to communismEven if they do think they're "ideologically commited" to communism, that doesn't mean shit. People are driven by their own material self-interest first and foremost. The CPC's party leadership has no material incentive to improve things for the Chinese people. At most, it might absorb its bourgeois into itself, achieving state capitalism. But even then, despite what some people seem to think, state capitalism on its own does not mean that the state has any incentive to wither away. On the contrary, in China's situation, the state would have all the incentive in the world to strengthen itself in such a situation.
>inb4 the CPC represents the proletariatIt doesn't. It represents itself. Representative democracy has already proved to not actually be very representative, and the CPC is structured in such a way that the people with the most sway over the direction the party takes are the people already entrenched in it, meaning the bureaucracy has very little incentive to be receptive to the needs of anyone but its own leadership.
>inb4 China's prosperous right nowSo? That has absolutely zero bearing on whether or not they're on the path to communism.
>inb4 they're better than the USThis is the only argument I can even slightly abide, but even then, it's the same retarded logic that democrats use to try to get leftists to vote for them.
I'm getting sick of this site. I've seen the same stupid fucking nonsense posted over and over again, and the more theory I actually study, the more I realize just how stupid and nonsensical it is.
>>2615571Frankly speaking if you leftcomm and reject ML every ML state is fascist.
End of the day, if you acknowledge the CPC as a vanguard party, China is socialist, if you do not, it's fascist. Simple as that.
>>2615230If Luxemburg survived the SPD and German communists won the civil war, you would hate them.
>>2615598I'm probably closer to ML than leftcom in the traditional sense. But vangardism is a bad idea. You're not going to have a party acting in interests of the workers for any extended length of time when the people in charge are not themselves workers.
>>2615571>Red fash idiocyGTFO, anarshit! Nobody asked for your braindead libel.
Why is noboby addressing my concerns in the OP??? Always derailing with irrelevant shit. kys
>>2615571>Materially, China is fascist. No.
>The class antagonism between bourgeois and proletariat still exists, they've just added another layer of control on top of itLet's ask Lenin whether class struggle continues to exist after the revolution:
<Socialism means the abolition of classes. The dictatorship of the proletariat has done all it could to abolish classes. But classes cannot be abolished at one stroke. And classes still remain and will remain in the era of the dictatorship of the proletariat. The dictatorship will become unnecessary when classes disappear. Without the dictatorship of the proletariat they will not disappear. Classes have remained, but in the era of the dictatorship of the proletariat every class has undergone a change, and the relations between the classes have also changed. The class struggle does not disappear under the dictatorship of the proletariat; it merely assumes different forms.Lenin, Economics And Politics In The Era Of The Dictatorship Of The Proletariat, 30 October, 1919
>>2613890>le debt-trap hoax but with a leftist spin"dollarize" doesn't mean anything. if you develop, you are going to have a foreign currency deficit at the beginning because you are importing the machines and the infrastructure -the capital- to develop. this is not the same as a neoliberal government destroying the local currency through a carry trade scheme, which is what people usually mean when they speak negatively of dollarization in the third world
>China's over productionit is only overproduction in the marxist sense if it can't find buyers at a profitable price, which is clearly not the case or you wouldn't be making the next point:
>deciminates the local industriescountries aren't forced to join the bri, if a country has a strategy to develop a sector through protectionism they can still join the bri and complement that strategy with new infrastructure. or maybe their strategy doesn't involve protectionism, or maybe the local bourgeoisie is so backwards and petty
not petite, half the illiterates in this site call the petite-bourgeoisie "petty-bourgeoisie" they don't have a strategy at all so it doesn't matter
>>2615607>But vangardism is a bad idea.Historically whats the alternative?
>>2615781China is not a dotp since the CCP who dictates things is composed of all classes, notably with billionaire capitalist members having more access to and leverage on the state apparatus than random wage workers.
In the USSR the NEPmen were
stripped from their right to vote, let alone be in the party.
>>2615571>Materially, China is fascistYour argument would have been stronger (but still incorrect) if you had said "formally" instead of "materially".
>>2615571>The CPC's party leadership has no material incentive to improve things for the Chinese people.I bet you believe that China is not democratic at all and is ruled top down. Recommend you actually study why China is socialist
>least consider the flaws of China's "Do nothing, win" strategy, and how it may paradoxically still lead to its undoing.
🚫Wrong. Communist China does not "do nothing." Thanks to Communist China, Communism is now dominant mode of production.
>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.
🫸Wrong. Communist China can never be defeated. Communist China has greatest defenses. Third-world europe is nothing like China. Third-world europe was correct in seceding from social fascist imperialist revisionist empire. Social imperialism fell to its own peculiar contradictions.
>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.
🇨🇳Wrong. You speak of blockading the world scientific hub and factory. Global economic collapse would be bad for everyone, but certainly the imperialist. Communist China has many powerful friends. Vietnam. Russia. Communist Korea. You fail to grasp that surrounding comprador states have deep bonds with Communist China. You speak of "lack of bases." Communist China has helped build ports and other infrastructure in over 100 nation.
>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.
✋️Wrong. Communist China has strongest navy, strongest army. Communist China have total food and energy security. If imperialist attack, Communist China arm all freedom loving people against imperialist.
>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.
🛑You are 100% wrong. You do nothing but slander Communist China. You liken Communist China to third-world Europe. You show solidarity with bourgeoisie by attacking Communist China. Solidarity with China means grasping Chinese strategy and defending China from slander. You are demoralization agent. All your ultimatums are western propaganda.
>>2616003it is democratic, and so are many other bourgeois nations, it wouldn't matter that it is anymore so than it's like another bourgeois nation, even states like the UAE and turkmenistan hold parliamentary elections, they aren't "ruled from the top down", yet are still ostensibly bourgeois nations ruled in contradiction to proletarian rule, this goes too for china and any other AES nation you like
>>2616023Wrong. The socialist transformation of private ownership of the means of production has been completed, the system of exploitation of man by man abolished, and a socialist system established. The exploiting class, as a class, has been eliminated. As a result of the replacement of China's old bourgeois production-relations by socialist production-relations, the economic laws of capitalism, expressing relations based on the exploitation of man by man, cease to operate. The law of surplus-value, the basic economic law of modern capitalism, disappears from the' scene. The general law of capitalist accumulation, the law of competition and anarchy of production, together with other laws, also disappear. The categories which express capitalist relations cease to exist: capital, surplus-value, capitalist profit price of production, wage-labour, the value of labour-power, etc.
>>2616005This bombastic response made me smile even though I disagree with some points. Very based post unironically. Leftypol should have this more.
>You show solidarity with bourgeoisie by attacking Communist ChinaStop calling me a demoraliser 😭
>>2616007
>>2616004
>>2616031
>Wrestling
Actual schizo
>>2615898Historically, communism as a movement is extraordinarily young. Marxism-Leninism and anarcho-communism are the only forms of socialism that have even been in the position to be tested in any meaningful way. To act as if we know the proper way to achieve communism based on the relative success of the former compared to the latter alone betrays an an extremely limited understanding of history.
But on my end, I propose a hybrid between vanguardism and direct democracy via sortition. Whenever the vangard wants to make a decision, it needs to run it by a handful of randomly selected workers and get their consent first. This way, you preserve the expediency of top-down leadership while also gaining more direct input from the workers and greater checks on power.
Note that I've thought about this in the context of war communism. My proposition should be workable, even if you're fighting off attempts at destruction by a stronger bourgeoisie state.
>>2616003>I bet you believe that China is not democratic at all and is ruled top down.I'll admit I am a bit rusty, but going off of what I remember from when I was studying China's political system in greater depth, they were similar to the Soviet Union; a very hierarchical, illiberal form of republicanism. If the idea of someone voting for someone else somewhere along the line makes something "democratic" then China does technically count, but in practice, the influence that the workers have on the state is so heavily abstracted that the country is in practice ruled by party leadership, not the other way around.
>>2616051You're extremely new. He makes some variation of this post like three times a day.
>>2616143Fuck off, anarshit! I've been here since the 8chan days. Stop derailing, and leave! >:(
>>2616238I'm not an anarchist, and have already said as much.
>I've been here since the 8chan days.I somehow doubt that.
>>2616286
It's not the anarchist flag. It's the libertarian socialism flag, which covers a much broader range of beliefs.
>>2616299
No. If I were somehow the magical king of the universe, we would be much harder on pedophiles, not less. The fact that you need to resort to unhinged accusations because you're unable to refute my actual point is frankly pathetic.
More to the point, I don't particularly care about specific policies. I care about achieving proletarian rule, and in terms of political economy, that means thinking about underlying systems, their viability, and their results; not the legality of anal sex or whatever other retarded nonsense people care about.
The only way to actually achieve proletarian control is, big shocker, a system where the proletariat is in control, not bureaucrats, elected or otherwise. To this end, we need
1. Proletarian law: laws must be passed via direct democracy. The specific form of direct democracy doesn't particularly matter, so long as the whole proletariat in a given area is eligible to vote, although I personally advocate for sortition. There should still be a vangard to draft the laws, so as to prevent political disorder and give the proletariat direction, especially early on when they're warding off reactionary forces. But they must not go forward with decisions until they gain the approval of the workers.
2. Proletarian politicians: elected officials must be held to strict age and term limits. This is to ensure that, after they've spent a sufficient amount of time leading the party, they go back to being ordinary workers, and thus will make decisions that benefit workers while in office.
3. Proletarian monopoly on violence: instead of having a dedicated police force or military, there must instead be a citizens militia, consisting of ordinary proles serving part-time, eliminating the use of violence as a tool imposed on the proletariat from the outside.
4. Proletarian economics: at the very least, the commanding heights of the economy must be nationalized and run by elected officials from the proletariat, elected by the proletariat.
5. Proletarian privilege: the bourgeois and lumpen, in so far as they're allowed to exist, must be considered second class citizens, lacking the ability to participate in politics. A dictatorship of the proletariat must be dictated by the proletariat.
How these features are implemented depends on the specific material conditions they're being implemented in, but they are the only surefire way to enact proletarian rule in the long term, as opposed to a state that is merely proletariat friendly in the short term.
By the way, I do critically support China. They've managed to achieve a high standard of living without exploiting other nations, I enjoy much of their cultural output, and overall they're the world power to get the most right. But they also have many of the same structural problems as the Soviet Union, and a few bad chairmen could torpedo the whole thing.
>>2616143>>2616143>>2616143>If the idea of someone voting for someone else somewhere along the line makes something "democratic" then China does technically count, but in practice, the influence that the workers have on the state is so heavily abstracted that the country is in practice ruled by party leadership, not the other way around.100% wrong. You think democracy is voting. This is incorrect. Democracy is control over means of production. Only proletarian democracy under dictatorship of proletariat can eliminate poverty, such as in Communist China. In Communist China, worker control is material, not abstract. In Communist China, workers do not "influence" State. In Communist China, workers ARE State. In Communist China, socialist rule of law and socialist moral value and proletarian wellbeing permeate all society
>the country is in practice ruled by party leadership, not the other way around.You have stumbled upon the definition of Communist dictatorship of proletariat and mistaken it for valid criticism. Praise be that China IS ruled by Communist Party!
>>2616423>100% wrong. You think democracy is voting. This is incorrect. Democracy is control over means of production.Bickering over literal semantics is the last refuge of the man whom has no argument.
Whatever terminology you want to use, the point remains: if we are to achieve a state that is controlled by people who perform labor, then politics must be driven, as much as possible, by people who perform labor. A full-time politician is not someone who performs labor. As such, in a state where the political sway of people who don't perform labor is to be minimized, the presence of full-time politicians is to be minimized. Insofar as full-time politicians are required for practical reasons, they must be culled from the group of people that perform labor, and given as much personal, egoistic reason as possible to work in favor of the people that do perform labor.
This is not a set of perspective policy proposals. It's a series of inferences based around the premise that people do what they perceive to be in their material best interests, a premise that virtually all commited materialists agree with, including Marx.
>Only proletarian democracy under dictatorship of proletariat can eliminate povertyWhy? What is your basis for this? Do you actually have any arguments for this, or are you just going to keep running in circles?
>In Communist China, worker control is material, not abstractMeaningless gibberish.
>In Communist China, workers do not "influence" State. In Communist China, workers ARE State.So tell me, oh wise one, what kind of productive labor has Xi Jinping performed in the last year? How about the last five years? The last ten?
>socialist moral valueMarx is spinning in his grave.
>You have stumbled upon the definition of Communist dictatorship of proletariatPlease refer to my first paragraph.
>Praise be that China IS ruled by Communist Party!Good fucking grief.
>>2613865>the global bourgeoisie has shown extreme amounts of solidarity amongst themselves, to great effectivenessLolno. Right this moment, USA is competing with Russia for the glorious title of a gas station with nukes, India chooses China over the West (even if wrecker behaviour remains), and Europe is trying to screw US dreams of petrodollar revenues over by trying to colonize Russia. I see no goddamn unity, everyone is at each others' throats, and China is exploiting this easily
>>2616470> politics must be driven, as much as possible, by people who perform labor.You are wrong, for such is the case in Communist China. By rejecting "democracy = control over MOP," you reject materialist basis of politics.
>Meaningless gibberish.You are the one who said meaningless gibberish. You are the one said, "worker control in Communist China is abstract." You blow but wind.
>A full-time politician is not someone who performs labor.Wrong. Ironic that you now use semantic to say all who work full-time for Communist Party does not work. You are fascist of anarcho-syndicalist deviation who denies Communist Party and therefore reject dictatorship of proletariat. Full-time Party member is full-time proletarian who contributes immense mental labor which is in fact multiplied simple labor. Without Communist Party, there is no dictatorship of proletariat.
>Why? What is your basis for this? Do you actually have any arguments for this, or are you just going to keep running in circles?>So tell me, oh wise one, what kind of productive labor has Xi Jinping performed in the last year? How about the last five years? The last ten?Xi Jinping provides greatest services to all workers of world as evidenced by fact that Communist China eliminated poverty.
>Marx is spinning in his grave.You reject socialist morality; therefore, you embrace bourgeois morality.
Praise be to China's Communist Party!
>>2616762>Full-time Party member is full-time proletarian who contributes immense mental laborSo the PMC comprises the proletariat? That's news to me!
>Xi Jinping provides greatest services to all workers of world as evidenced by fact that Communist China eliminated poverty.Okay, but what form of
productive labor has he done in the past century? What
product has he produced, procured, or preserved using his
labor, which is to say, by actually physically doing something, not by directing someone else.
Cope thread
>>2617351
<muh labor is when coal minerfucking retard. just because america is a dictatorship of the bourgeois wherein the positions of power are captured by the capitalist class, doesn't mean literally every managerial position and task is 'PMC'. do you not think that communism requires specialists in organization and management? do you really think communism is when mcdonalds employee is president? what 'productive labor' did Lenin, or Stalin, or Trotsky perform beyond their administrative and managerial functions? were they secretly fucking farmers between leading revolutionary armies?
>>2617360>do you not think that communism requires specialists in organization and management?Of course it does. But these specialists should also have first hand knowledge of what they're organizing and managing, and a personal stake in how it's organized and managed.
>do you really think communism is when mcdonalds employee is president?Yes.
>what 'productive labor' did Lenin, or Stalin, or Trotsky perform beyond their administrative and managerial functions? were they secretly fucking farmers between leading revolutionary armies?Note how th Soviet Union ultimately failed to achieve the long-term goal of achieving a classless, stateless society, and is no longer in existence. Do you think that maybe, just maybe, there's something to be learned here?
>Sounds crazy, I know, but I think Xi-fans should at least consider the flaws of China's "Do nothing, win" strategy,
But they aren't doing nothing. China is pouring resources into infrastructure development, setting up to transition to the next stage of socialism, and ensuring the PLA is modern and ready.
>>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: 58