- cross-posted to:
- chapotraphouse@hexbear.net
- cross-posted to:
- chapotraphouse@hexbear.net
You must log in or # to comment.
Chad Xi.jpeg
Do nothing.
Win.
And failing
46 minute: China’s proposal
40 minute: divergence between elite and electorate
Is that true? At least for a war against Russia the majority seems willing to fight.
There’s a reason all the parties in charge of the major European countries are polling under 20% now. Look at France, Germany, and UK as prime examples. The regimes are deeply unpopular. And even despite all the propaganda, vast majority of people don’t have an interest in actually fighting Russia. AfD in Germany, RN and Progressive Front in France all have anti war platform. A party that’s against the war just won massively in Bulgaria as well.
In Germany, no party in parliament would oppose a war against Russia. At most the AfD would, but the AfD seems to be split between pro Russia and pro USA forces. So if the US do their homework there won’t be an opposition.
People on the street may oppose the war but they don’t make the decision.
AfD is polling like at 30% now and it’s by far the most popular party. So, when the next election comes they’re very likely to be the dominant force in German politics. Especially given that the economy can only get worse in the mean time. And what do you think the chances of the US doing their homework are given what we see unfolding in Iran?
AfD is polling like at 30% now
Even with 49% they can’t prevent the decision for war.
And what do you think the chances of the US doing their homework are given what we see unfolding in Iran?
I believe in Trump as a mad man figure head. The US are decoupling. They may have been surprised by the number of hits and the number of rockets but they couldn’t expect a regime change. The shutting down of the strait was expected by them. It’s the world that had to be eased into accepting the chaos that is going to come. A burning Middle East has always been the prediction for a war with Iran and it has always been said that it can’t be conquered. The US has no invasion force there so the current situation is part of the plan. People accept it because it is explicable and thus excusable because of Trump.
The US is doing their homework in Europe. There will be age verification on the internet. The police is going to use Palantir. The economy will depend on US AI services. Europe will be ready when people don’t accept Trump as an excuse anymore. The economy will switch to weapons manufacturing so the problems will be postponed.
Your original question was whether there is a disconnect between the public and the elites, and the answer is that there is. You’re now moving to the discussion of whether AfD would actually be able to stop the war or not. That’s a separate question. Also, there’s a good chance it’s a moot question given the economic shock from the war on Iran in Europe. It simply might not be possible for Europe to keep supporting Ukraine materially in the near future.
And I agree that the attack on Iran goes beyond Trump, but my point is that the execution was very much bungled in every way imaginable. If this was done under, say Obama, they would’ve come up with a solid pretext, got allied on board, and managed the narrative a lot more skilfully. Trump admin didn’t bother with any of that, and this is creating real problems for the US geopolitically because everybody can see clearly what the empire is doing here. There isn’t even attempt to hide it.
But the real target isn’t actually Iran, the goal appears to be to disrupt energy shipments to Asia to create instability and dependence on US energy exports. This is the same playbook that was used to cut Europe off from cheap Russian energy. And once the US starts having influence over countries by controlling their energy supplies they will drive their politics to turn them into proxies against China the same way Europe was turned into a proxy against Russia.
Going back to Europe, the real question is how much of this the public is willing to swallow. The age verification and other ways to stifle free speech is not going to go over well when people are already angry. And switching to weapons manufacturing will necessitate further austerity. Personally, I don’t think that’s even possible to do in practical terms with the energy prices being what they are. Remember the whole plan to produce 1.5 million shells for Ukraine? I expect this will work out in a similar way. The EU will make a slush fund, a bunch of people will line their pockets, and nothing much will actually materialize in the end.
That’s a separate question.
Sorry, that was sloppy. My point is that the AfD is not the majority of the public so there is not a complete disconnect.
It simply might not be possible for Europe to keep supporting Ukraine materially
It will be funny if Europe switches to a planned economy. As long as the raw materials are available I expect Europe to deliver.
There isn’t even attempt to hide it.
I think the US fundamentally switched communication strategies. The internet reveals everything. It has become impossible to maintain moral superiority for neocolonial wars. The US embraced that and installed a president who hides the truth in plain sight.
Thiel and the scapegoat theories remind me too much of Trump. https://read.lukeburgis.com/p/peter-thiel-on-rene-girard
But the real target isn’t actually Iran, the goal appears to be to disrupt energy shipments to Asia
Agree. I read something about Alaska terminals. Though I think Iran would be helpful for supply routes against Russia, like it was in ww2.
Personally, I don’t think that’s even possible to do in practical terms with the energy prices being what they are.
Tariffs are supposed to end the US trade deficit which gifted resources to the US. I think the higher energy costs replace that. At least Germany always handed some surplus over to the US. So I expect the economy to keep working.
AfD looks like it’s the single most popular party now, and their support keeps growing while other parties are declining. Seems that them connecting the war to the economic decline people are feeling is a key reason. Polls also show the war to be unpopular, for example: https://en.yenisafak.com/world/most-germans-want-merz-to-hold-direct-talks-with-putin-poll-reveals-3714541
And even with a planned economy, the big issue is energy. Europe is now almost entirely dependent on the US, and until that problem is solved there’s not much that can change.
And agree, the US is now an openly predatory power that’s squeezing their vassals for all it can. The mask is completely off now.
The big difference from WW2 is modern China which is the biggest industrial base in the world by far. What I expect will happen is a lot of Eurasia will get integrated in trade over land. Pakistan already opened six routes from Iran just recently. We’re likely going to see more of that.
The other flaw with the American plan is that it assumes fossil fuels are the only game in town. I expect Asia will now double down on Chinese solar panels as an alternative, and the demand for oil and gas is never going to come back to previous levels.
And yeah the whole tariff policy was a huge failure. The US industry is actually shrinking right now. But again, Europe needs to get off American energy to actually start developing. Chinese renewables are the obvious choice, but seems like there’s still a lot of sinophobia in the EU.
… Continuation: https://feddit.org/post/29297575/12938038
looks like we reached the max thread depth here 🤣
People who survive in the hell outside aren’t going to be receptive towards the rats in the bunker.
Unless they have family who needs cancer medicine. Structuring society is the core competence of the elite. The technology race with China is the difficult part.
The fact that they do have huge rainfalls now, likely indicates that it was a natural pattern.
Yes, it’s just fate like the Tsunami for Japan. With that water Iran has a much easier war to fight. They tried to buy water before but the other countries declined. I think I got it from here: https://feddit.org/post/21869942 but I won’t watch it to verify.
but it’s not clear to me that the droughts were manufactured.
By not selling the water. Of course there is also the manufactured weather part but that’s a topic better not to touch in serious.
it’s unlikely these will be the customers for Iran going forward.
My mistake. There is also a project for Qatar. I forgot to link after having seen the relevant quote on the linked page.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar–Turkey_pipeline
The problem for the US is that they have to be everywhere at once. … The math does not work in the US favor.
It’s GDR and Stasi again. The US must use so many intelligent people for spying that they have none for their economy. AI is their only way out.
Central Ukraine will almost certainly fall under Russian control.
Russia was happy with the new republics in the original peace treaty. I can’t imagine that they will waste much more lives than making their point. Having the Dnieper as a border would be nice but it would mean having to conquer Kyiv. Even then, the Dnieper is the border and Europe would have free shipping. I think we are preparing for 2029 to be able to intervene should Russia try to cross the Dnieper.
… with millions more refugees. Given the current economic situation in Europe and the rising energy prices, this seems like a very bad scenario.
Free workers, gas from Qatar and a decoupling from China so everything has to be produced locally. That’s a perfect alignment.
The break up of USSR was an internal power grab by people who should’ve been shot for treason.
But why weren’t they? Were the harvest problems resolved? I should read that part of history on my own though. The way Gorbatchev was treated afterwards by the West has always left me suspicious that they had an even bigger influence.
Again, trade wasn’t a big part of the economy and that means defaulting would have had pretty much no effect on it.
Unless they wanted to open up to the global economy and needed a reputation to receive credits.
clever enough to not crush the country
I fail to see what you base the second part on.
E.g. Trump himself. I think it’s a conscious decision to adapt to an age of information wars. It’s the opposite of the Chinese 5 year plan predictability. People don’t expect morality anymore or a coherent narrative. They are free to do whatever is necessary to maintain their power.
Or the Ukraine war. It’s impressive that historic facts don’t count and are ignored in arguments. To pull this off and maintain control, that’s impressive.
Unless they have family who needs cancer medicine. Structuring society is the core competence of the elite. The technology race with China is the difficult part.
It really isn’t. This is just the mythology they’ve built up around themselves. They’re in no way necessary. Out of millions of people, there are plenty of competent organizers out there who would quickly step up.
By not selling the water. Of course there is also the manufactured weather part but that’s a topic better not to touch in serious.
I’m still skeptical there’s a long term structural problem here in the first place. The water situation seems to be far more precarious in the Gulf states which rely on desalination for something like 90% of their water. So, if the conflict does escalate, the problems will be on the US aligned side if Iran decides to bomb that infrastructure.
It’s GDR and Stasi again. The US must use so many intelligent people for spying that they have none for their economy. AI is their only way out.
AI really isn’t a way out because you still need people to validate what AI outputs, and spying isn’t the only issue. It’s lack of force projection capacity. The US does not have the industry needed to rule over the whole world. That’s the elephant in the room. This is why I keep explaining that it’s the material conditions that matter the most. You need tanks, and jets, and trucks, and ammunition, and food, and all of that has to be delivered across the globe to prop up your bases and soldiers stationed there. That’s an incredible drain on the resources.
Russia was happy with the new republics in the original peace treaty. I can’t imagine that they will waste much more lives than making their point.
I don’t think that’s how it will play out. If you look at the end of WW2, what happened was that German fighting capacity collapsed, and then the Soviets were in Berlin within months. I expect the same thing will happen in Ukraine. Once the army collapses through attrition, Russia will simply dictate terms. They’re not going to be fighting for every centimetre of Ukraine. They will hold referendums, and a lot of oblasts will join Russia as a result. If you look at the demographics, it’s pretty easy to see how this will play out in the end.
The slides from this lecture that Mearsheimer gave back in 2015 are a good overview:
here’s how the election in 2004 went:
this is the 2010 election:
I expect, that’s where the split will lie in the end.
Free workers, gas from Qatar and a decoupling from China so everything has to be produced locally. That’s a perfect alignment.
Last I looked, Qatar isn’t exporting much of anything right now, and the infrastructure is going to take at least half a decade to rebuild. Also, Qatar isn’t nearly sufficient to fuel all of Europe even when it was operating at peak capacity.
But why weren’t they? Were the harvest problems resolved? I should read that part of history on my own though. The way Gorbatchev was treated afterwards by the West has always left me suspicious that they had an even bigger influence.
There never were any food shortages until after the dissolution. I can tell you that from personal experience. Gorbachev was a traitor and should’ve been shot.
Unless they wanted to open up to the global economy and needed a reputation to receive credits.
But if they already had a self sufficient economy, that clearly wouldn’t be a reason for economic collapse given the existing state of things. It might’ve precluded some future expansion, but it wouldn’t have been the major driver of internal economic problems within the system as it was.
E.g. Trump himself. I think it’s a conscious decision to adapt to an age of information wars.
It’s not just Trump. It’s the whole apparatus that’s failing, and the problems were the same under Biden. Also, the rule of empires is that the oligarchs always focus on infighting during the waning days of the empire. And we’re seeing this in the US as well. It is not a homogeneous force with everyone pulling in the same direction. There are factions within the US that are now fighting each other.
Or the Ukraine war. It’s impressive that historic facts don’t count and are ignored in arguments. To pull this off and maintain control, that’s impressive.
Ukraine will be taught in history schools as the turning point which collapsed the empire. It was the pivotal moment where the limits of US economic power were exposed. Russia prevailed in the initial sanctions assault and major powers like China and India refused to join on the sanctions. This directly led to the formation of a parallel economic system that the US has no control over. Much of the world trade no longer goes through SWIFT, and it is completely opaque to the West. And once this was ironed out with Russia it’s increasingly being expanded across BRICS and nations that trade with them. This makes sanctions largely ineffective, and it directly set the stage for what we see now with Iran demanding oil is traded in yuan. Without the transaction system in place, that would’ve been impossible. Thus, the US lost its biggest leverage over the world by provoking a war in Ukraine.
They’re in no way necessary.
No doubt. But their skill is to make themselves necessary.
problems will be on the US aligned side
They will. The water control was just a possible reason why the US could have been successful in Afghanistan despite losing the war.
The US does not have the industry needed to rule over the whole world.
Why not? They have Blackrock and own many shares all over the world and the CEOs come to their conference in Davos.
Once the army collapses through attrition, Russia will simply dictate terms. They’re not going to be fighting for every
Crossing the Dnieper can’t be easy and thus should be sufficiently easy to defend. Before the front collapses, Ukraine will fall back to that line.
For raw man power, Europe will send reinforcements to protect E40.
If the war lasts longer then whoever has autonomous drones ready first will win.
I expect, that’s where the split will lie in the end.
It could be, but E40 is too valuable and requires the western part up to Kherson.
It would turn Poland into an industrial powerhouse. Thus they should be motivated enough to defend the Dnieper on their own if Ukraine lost their manpower.
Qatar isn’t nearly sufficient to fuel all of Europe
It just has to be enough to guarantee that Europe is a buyers market. Iran and Russia and all the other countries can be allowed to sell, too.
There never were any food shortages until after the dissolution.
Because they imported.
But if they already had a self sufficient economy
They hadn’t. They needed wheat which means, given the available farm land and oil, they needed fertilizers and machines. Why else would the USSR of all places need to import grain? They also couldn’t catch up with digital technology. The GDR was aware and invested 1980ies billions but did not succeed.
It’s not just Trump. It’s the whole apparatus that’s failing
If Trump is for real then they are failing for real. But then, why is nobody organising an impeachment? So Trump is deception and no matter the infighting, they stand behind whatever the goal is.
Thus, the US lost its biggest leverage over the world by provoking a war in Ukraine.
True, but with the rise of China it couldn’t last for much longer. It’s not rocket science and China has the size to guarantee its stability.
The US would have definitely lost their empire if they had done nothing. Losing SWIFT is colateral damage. For Ukraine Russia left Syria then Iran could be bombed. But more importantly, Germany is split from Russia. This makes US isolation much easier.
I still think that they want to turn Russia so that they can isolate China. Why else maintain the island chain? But it looks impossible.
No doubt. But their skill is to make themselves necessary.
Yet, revolutions happen and oligarchs get deposed. Causing a nuclear holocaust would certainly be a good trigger for such an event.
Why not? They have Blackrock and own many shares all over the world and the CEOs come to their conference in Davos.
Just look at industrial production numbers and it all becomes clear. For example, the US produces about as much steel as Russia does. China produces an order of magnitude more. It’s pretty clear that the US does not have industrial capacity to run a global empire.
Crossing the Dnieper can’t be easy and thus should be sufficiently easy to defend. Before the front collapses, Ukraine will fall back to that line.
We’ll see, but these things aren’t linear. It’s not going to be just a gradual and controlled attrition. At some point you end up with a phase change and collapse happens all at once. Europe isn’t going to be able to prevent that.
It would turn Poland into an industrial powerhouse. Thus they should be motivated enough to defend the Dnieper on their own if Ukraine lost their manpower.
Again, the elephant in the room is the lack of cheap energy.
It just has to be enough to guarantee that Europe is a buyers market. Iran and Russia and all the other countries can be allowed to sell, too.
But it’s not, it’s only around 15% last I looked.
Because they imported.
Yes they did, but largely from friendly countries.
They hadn’t. They needed wheat which means, given the available farm land and oil, they needed fertilizers and machines. Why else would the USSR of all places need to import grain? They also couldn’t catch up with digital technology. The GDR was aware and invested 1980ies billions but did not succeed.
Some of it was mismanagement, and it would’ve been possible to reorient production to increase yields as Russia is doing today.
True, but with the rise of China it couldn’t last for much longer. It’s not rocket science and China has the size to guarantee its stability.
Timing does matter though because it precluded US plans against China. Now we’re in a different world, and choking China economically is impossible. Trump’s tariff war proved that. If the war in Ukraine didn’t happen, things would’ve played out very differently due to SWIFT being the central trading system.
I still think that they want to turn Russia so that they can isolate China. Why else maintain the island chain? But it looks impossible.
Oh that was absolutely the plan. They didn’t even hide it. https://nationalinterest.org/feature/case-american-led-peace-ukraine-206732
But plans don’t always work out the way you expect. And the strategy was a failure pushing Russia and China closer together.
Causing a nuclear holocaust would certainly be a good trigger for such an event
With propaganda people will believe that the Russians started it.
It’s pretty clear that the US does not have industrial capacity to run a global empire.
They just have to own it or make sure that there is competition and prices are low. Steel from India is as good as Steel from Pittsburg.
Europe isn’t going to be able to prevent that.
They can take over parts of the front.
Qatar gas … But it’s not, it’s only around 15% last I looked.
300 billion m3 per year https://ieefa.org/eu-gas-flows-tracker
vs
160 billion m3 per year https://geographic.org/stats/qatar/qatar_natural_gas_production_time_series.html
That should be enough to make EU industries competitive again. With that option, Russian gas stops being a dependency and can be allowed, too, as well as gas from Iran and the new gas from Israel.
Some of it was mismanagement, and it would’ve been possible to reorient production to increase yields as Russia is doing today.
Your argument for Swift, timing.
If the war in Ukraine didn’t happen, things would’ve played out very differently due to SWIFT being the central trading system.
How? China’s products can only be replaced gradually. That gives China time to establish it.
And the strategy was a failure pushing Russia and China closer together.
They made that choice when they didn’t accept Russia into Nato. Regime change in Russia is a ‘nice to have’ but they must have plans to contain them together. They could have asked Russia to split into regions up to the 00ies and then join the EU on equal terms while China could be isolated for being communist. Market economy for China had done its duty when the USSR collapsed.
A side note:
I think most productivity gains come from outsourcing work to China which just means lower wages. Having to do them by ourselves, we will fall back to 90ies productivity. The decoupling will be tough.
With propaganda people will believe that the Russians started it.
You seem to think these people are all powerful and have some supernatural powers. They’re just rich assholes, and they’re not special. You really need to understand that the oligarchs are just regular fucking people who derive all their privilege from the fact they were born lucky. That’s it.
They just have to own it or make sure that there is competition and prices are low. Steel from India is as good as Steel from Pittsburg.
India doesn’t have the industrial capacity to produce steel either. They decided to go straight into financialization of their economy skipping the critical step. The problem the west has right now is that China is the key industrial power in the world. There’s no path to changing that in the foreseeable future, certainly not before the US collapses.
They can take over parts of the front.
I’m sure that’s gonna play great with the public. Last I looked, the governments in Europe are already scraping rock bottom in terms of popularity. Europe might have literal revolutions if they try to have a direct war with Russia.
That should be enough to make EU industries competitive again. With that option, Russian gas stops being a dependency and can be allowed, too, as well as gas from Iran and the new gas from Israel.
It’s not. During the winter of 2025–2026, approximately 7% of Europe’s LNG imports came from Qatar. That’s nowhere near enough. https://fsr.eui.eu/how-the-war-with-iran-is-reshaping-europes-gas-security/
How? China’s products can only be replaced gradually. That gives China time to establish it.
If the US slapped tariffs on China when China could only use SWIFT for settlements, then China would’ve had to eat the tariff or just stop all their exports while they figured out a new system. That would’ve had a significant impact on their own economy. They could hurt US back, but their own economy would suffer too. Having a readily available alternative gave China an incredible amount leverage.
And yes, the west absolutely could have absorbed Russia after USSR fell. Turning Russia into an adversary was another huge strategic blunder for the empire.
I think most productivity gains come from outsourcing work to China which just means lower wages.
That hasn’t been true for a while actually. The reason China is so far ahead in cost of production is mass automation and vertical supply chains. China has an incredible density of industry meaning that you have very tight and efficient logistics where all the components can often be produced in the same province or even the same city. Nothing like this exists anywhere else in the world.
