This and 3000% tariff on solar panels from SE Asia, they're trying to help Chinese solar sector now? Mind you SE Asia solar industry are mostly Chinese owned or deeply dependent on Chinese supply chain but still
Trump 2.0 official thread
- Thread starter siegecrossbow
- Start date
This and 3000% tariff on solar panels from SE Asia, they're trying to help Chinese solar sector now? Mind you SE Asia solar industry are mostly Chinese owned or deeply dependent on Chinese supply chain but still
As far as I can tell, their "logic" was that other nations would quickly cave in and beg for a one sided deal because the US is such a large consumer market that the rest of the world could not do without them so the US could dictate terms just by threatening to walk off. That is Trump's whole "I'm a department store" ramble except he still thinks the US provides goods as if it were the 1950's. The incompetent people working for Trump clearly did not appreciate supply chain complexity, critical areas of dependence like rare earths, nor the time needed to build factories and new supply chains if truly trying to restart manufacturing in the US.
The stupid thing is...they should have been able to see a hint of this after the first attempt at a trade war and they had no real plan B if the rest of the world did not cave in, even though China did not in the first trade war. For Trump and his people to be shocked at retaliation (which apparently they were this time round just as they were in the first trade war) means they haven't learned a thing.
Lethe
Captain
A world of shared prosperity within a framework of mutual respect may be possible within the Chinese intellectual and cultural framework. It is not possible within the American mythological framework that asserts and requires undisputed primacy across all axes of power. The risk of unbounded conflict escalating to catastrophic results is very real precisely because there are no limits to what America will do to maintain its mythological image of itself and to impose its sense of order upon the world. The American establishment (for these purposes, including Trump and most of his entourage) is as ideologically driven and uncompromising in its own way as the Taliban or Wahhabi extremists are in theirs. For Washington this is an essentially religious war, one that echoes to a greater or lesser extent throughout the Anglosphere and broader west. Washington would see itself impoverished and the rest of the world in flames so long as the Stars and Stripes still fly atop the ash heap. How the United States reached that point is tale going back centuries and will, in the very best-case scenario, take decades to incrementally unwind to some semblance of stability.
Last edited:
The department store reference is particularly funny because it would actually be a perfect metaphor for China.
FriedRiceNSpice
Captain
The US has a highly educated population, with 90%+ literacy and 40% attaining college degrees. Yet they were blind to the plundering of their country by the oligarchs, failed to see beyond the lies and propaganda propagated by the MSM and ultimately powerless to stop the rapid decay and decline of their country.
Despite 3000 years of dynastic rule, no Chinese dynasty has been able to break the cycle of rise and decline that has characterized every Chinese dynasty in history. Each dynasty began with land/wealth redistribution and capable administration, bringing about a golden age of growth, prosperity, and progress. However, over the course of the dynasty, wealth, land, and power inevitably flowed away from the people and central administration and into the coffers of the few, resulting in the downfall of the dynasty. Each successive dynasty tried its best to learn from the mistakes of its predecessors, yet none have ever managed to break the cycle.
Last edited:
Yes, but Trump's mind is permanently stuck in an idealized 1950's where the US is the only provider of goods in the world and the rest of the world has to grovel and accept whatever terms are offered.
The more accurate analogy would be China is the store and the US is the customer that is barred and kicked out for rude behavior, only there are no other stores that sell what the customer wants so the customer is standing outside the doors screaming and shouting whil ethe store stays shut to them.
Oh, hold on. Does Trump think that when his advisors say "American demand is a global public good," that means that "American demand" belongs on the export of goods side of the balance of payments, like their demand itself is a physical good they aren't being compensated for?
lmfao, actually existing Brad Stetserism/Michael Pettisism in action! No wonder the whole world thinks they've literally gone insane, next up China should demand massive tribute as it's demand of supply has gone completely uncompensated for!!
The dynastic cycle is something that has held true for I think pretty much all organized human states larger than the hunter gatherer tribe. There is the constant tension between the central authority and the other potential centers of power whether this be nobles, patricians, outlying governors, billionaire oligarchs, etc... The oligarchs may have arisen because of central government patronage, promotion to noble class for actions done by their ancestors to support the government, or by successful business, but regardless they eventually aim to further their own selfish or family interests over that of the government. They are not necessarily actively disloyal or trying to overturn the system since their own wealth and power depends on perpetuation of the system. Every dynastic change pretty much swept away the old oligarch class to replace it with new people so these same oligarchs don't really want revolution. However their attempts to advance their own personal interests inevitably eroded the power and wealth of the government to the point where a revolution took place.
No government in human history has overcome this problem, and things usually come to a head between 200-400 years after a dynasty's formation. That is when the central authority's resources become so starved that it cannot cope with external shocks such as external enemies or natural disasters. Attempts at clawing back resources usually fail or are insignificant because there are central authority supporters among the oligarchs or there is capture of the levers of state by the oligarchs so attempts at revoking privileges or taking back wealth are ultimately ineffectual as the central authority avoids antagonizing its own supporters. Even though individual oligarchs might fall and have their wealth confiscated, the overall trend is still ever increasing concentration of wealth and power into other centers of power. Eventually with wealth comes military and political power such as seen with the warlord figures in the late Han or Three Kingdoms period.
The fall of a dynasty would lead to a resetting of the board as the old oligarchs are replaced by new ones, to then repeat the cycle. While the unique features of each dynasty might have resulted in a speeding up or slowing down of the cycle, the cycle still turned. It has probably sped up with more technology as greater tech and sophistication accelerates the speed at which wealth generation and accumulation can occur.
FriedRiceNSpice
Captain
An examination of the history of the United States reveals that the rise and fall of the US also does not deviate much from the Chinese dynastic cycle. I would dare to go on to generalize that the dynastic cycle is the natural path for any society that develops in a vacuum devoid of major direct external pressures. Although I only have a very superficial understanding of the history of the Roman empire, I wouldn't be surprised if Rome too fell victim to this cycle.
On the other hand, the only scenarios in which societies do not succumb to the dynastic cycle occurs when societies are pitted in constant conflict/competition with one another. States of the Warring States Period, ie Qin, Zhao, Chu, Wei lasted far longer than of the dynasties that followed. The same can be observed with the history of Europe over the past millennia, where European states and monarchs were in constant conflict/competition with one another.
Last edited:
I realize you’ve misunderstood much of my intent. You should review my past statements—my stance toward America.
The strategies I’ve outlined are primarily aimed at third-world nations. These are the ones we must assist.
As for established industrial powers like the U.S., Europe, and Japan: let them figure things out gradually. There’s no urgency to engage them. Wasting time on America is pointless—only if it declines into a regional power and accepts that status might China aid it. Otherwise, wouldn’t “helping” just prop up its existing system?
Europe and Japan can be pulled back from the brink, but they too are entrenched in the exploitative global hierarchy—albeit less ruthlessly than America.
China’s new system inherently disadvantages nations that thrive on external plunder and exploitation.