Trump 2.0 official thread

[manqiangrexue]

True but XHS had no business with the US and it is neither the largest nor a technically innovative app. It is a decent app with a moderate user base.

That is their screw up entirely. We didn't look to suck them into an app; the US government created rebellious sentiment by banning TikTok. On that, China got lucky like a blind cat running into a dead mouse.

Why aren't Americans in awe at say, Korean Naver? Why did Naver showing pictures of Seoul have not even 0.1% the effect that XHS has on Americans to the degree of them being in shock and angry at their own government, not merely impressed?

1. Cus no one is impressed by their own colony. America has Korea subjugated.
2. Their country is a mess. The life stress over there is insane. Every president ends up in jail. The current president was holed up in a bunker hiding from his own military.
3. Korea is factually a weak nation compared to China. Americans are aware that despite all of America's best efforts to suppress China, China is emerging into the next champion in hard power. Deepseek, 6th gen fighters, Huawei's semiconductors, etc... America can't match it and Korea has nothing that could stand against American pressure like that. America starts a trade war with China and it lost. America started a tech war with China and it lost; the returns just haven't all come in yet. Given that, America doesn't dare start a hot war with China. This is a situation where the enemy is so powerful and fought so admirably starting from a heavy underdog position that you can't help but respect him. That's just not Korea.

Hard power being everything only matters if everyone is 100% rational and the cost of imposing hard power is 0. Nobody is 100% rational and there's always a price for imposing hard power even on a weaker opponent, sometimes ruinously high.

People are mostly rational though, especially when given time. To oppose domineering American hard power without sufficient hard power of their own, countries either ended up like North Korea/Cuba or eventually came around, making excuses for why America isn't so bad after all. Or they were couped by hard power.

 

[Wrought]

Wow, I actually feel pity for the guy now.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1887227834239754641

 

[Serb]

Why would any sovereign country allow USAID (or similar orgs) to sponsor "independent" media in their countries at all?

Smaller countries allow this probably due to the fear of the US's hard power, coups, various economic sanctions, etc. However, increasingly less so, as the US hard power potential wanes out. And they are catching onto the game, in general, so they are creating their own local media to maintain counter-balance. They think that it's better to allow such media and play a permanent game of chess against them than face the US full-on right away. Or at least that is how it's in my country, but it has similar politics as elsewhere in the Global South. My government also gets tangible economic investment from the West, especially the EU, so it's not polite to be like Cuba or VNZ, which are full-on in a 'fight' already.

many "esteemed" members here will explain,
sOfT PoWeR Is uSeLeSs
oNlY HaRd pOwEr mAtTeRs
hArD PoWeR CaN StOp sOfT PoWeR EaSiLy wItHiN ThEiR OwN BoRdErS.

and that's why the American empire was able to wage psychological warfare / soft power operations all over China with impunity for decades.
1. brainwash Uyghurs in Xinjiang to become terrorists
2. brainwash Hong Konger's to become terrorists / rioters
3. currently brainwashing Chinese women with extreme feminism
4. and have multiple psychological warfare operations run by the "Shanghai Media Group" that would still be running if usaid continued funding.

They will also tell you that anyone sounding the alarm "has no idea what he is talking about.".

The question you should ask is what kind of ROI the American Empire gets from that.

Or, if that was supposed to be performing well, why are they dismantling it now?

Or, how come the Chinese government has regular 95% support rates if their ROI was good?

Also, you should ask what kind of opportunity cost are they missing elsewhere.

For example for the long-term survival of the empire, is it smart to squander money externally,

Or is it smarter to invest domestically in crumbling infrastructure or a rotting economy?

I think that Musk, one of the smartest oligarchs in the US has given us that answer.

You contradict yourself.

First you say hard power can stop soft power attacks easily within a nation's borders...

Now, you agree with me and admit that hard power cannot stop soft power within a nation's borders easily.

Hard power can easily stop soft power inside of its borders or anywhere else.

That's what Russia and China largely did over time inside their countries.

So their leaders and governments now have 90%+ support rates objectively.

Even many smaller countries like Nicaragua, Bolivia, and many African countries,

Started banning those US NGOs' funding and media in the past long time ago.

China probably allows some micro pockets of that to pacify natural inner libtards.

After all, not everyone is a fool due to the brainwashing, some are fools naturally.

They can then say, look we gave you 'freedom', so what do you want anymore?

And they probably see them as some lesser single-digit irrelevant clowns too.

 

[name]

It's simple. China's hard power is still not enough to contend against the US in all domains.

China is chipping away US advantage in various aspects but there is still way to go. Dethroning the world hegemon has always been a slow process

That's off topic.

This is not about dethroning America around the world. It's about using a nation's hard power to stop a hostile foreign psyop inside one's nation.

@manqiangrexue

There is no such thing as soft power. There is only the nonviolent extension of hard power and just useless begging.

No. You don't get to redefine terms. The definitions are clear. Hard power is transactional - offer something positive (eg money) or threaten something negative (eg pain) for a desired action.

Soft power is non-transactional. Nothing is exchanged, but a change occurs in the mind of the targets (eg radicalization), which may cause a change in behavior (eg terrorist attack). None of those Xinjiang terrorists even got weapons from the usa. They used kitchen knives, hammers, and vehicles. The CIA's funding, arming, and training of Tibetan separatists decades ago would be an example of hard power.

Setting up a fake NGO / media that brainwashes people into doing desired behaviors is a textbook example of Western soft power / psychological warfare.

Playing fast and loose with definitions is your typical weasel tactic to confuse people. Making everything a "nonviolent extension of hard power" allows you to "win" arguments by making up overly broad bullshit definitions that label everything as hard power.

Going by your "logic", everything is hard power. Even begging is hard power with your definition because begging requires bodily movement, which requires energy, which requires food, which requires money and farming tools.

bEgGiNg iS A NoN ViOlEnT ExTeNsIoN Of hArD PoWeR. Confirmed.


@FairAndUnbiased

Paying fake news propagandists is literally hard power.

No. You are using an overly broad definition. If this is true then everything is hard power. If we use this definition then music, movies, tv shows, video games, religion, ideology, and even memes are all hard power because they need technology, money, etc. See my reply to manqiangrexue directly above.

There is indeed soft power but that is shit like religion and ideology. You might have seen it on XHS. Did China pay millions of Americans to use the app and expose real conditions in the US? Did China threaten them with J-20? Exactly.

This is not the type of win that you think it is. The XHS situation proves several things. First, China had sufficient hard power to get soft power 10-15 years ago as I have repeatedly stated. Two, white worshippping policy and media is a useless waste of resources. Three, China's soft power department sucks. Why didn't foreigners know earlier how good China was and why didn't Chinese people know how bad usa was earlier? Awful marketing by China's PR system. This is not even a soft power victory. This is more of hard power victory. The actual soft power victory is (was) how usa duped the Chinese into thinking usa was a utopia until foreigners themselves (not Chinese PR goons) credibly exposed usa's problems. USA is NOT a utopia but duped Chinese people into believing it was AND that lead to a large percentage of them doing the West's desired behaviors (brain drained, sexpat success, trust, respect, given easy jobs, buy their over priced products/services, trust them in their supply chains, etc). Four, it doesn't take decades to undo Western propaganda. Tiktok refugees themselves stated they got China pilled in 2-3 days.

Support for China isn't tied to being paid to support China or being threatened to support China. That is true soft power.

This current victory is more of a hard power victory (home ownership, safe, technology, clean, affordable).Yes, it produces soft power, but this victory is rooted in hard power. To date, the west's ability to dupe is still the gold standard of psychological warfare. They are duping people with an illusion. No one was duped into liking China. They like China because of real results, especially compared to the failures of their own nation.



@Serb

The question you should ask is what kind of ROI the American Empire gets from that.

A very good ROI. They've used the soft power + hard power 2 hit combo to take over most of the planet best lands already. They got close to overthrowing China's government in 1989.

Or, if that was supposed to be performing well, why are they dismantling it now?

I have no idea, but Trump is a bull in a China shop right now wrecking everything.

Or, how come the Chinese government has regular 95% support rates if their ROI was good?

How come HK rioters killed people and did 5 billion usd in damage?
Why did Uyghur terrorists kill thousands of innocent Chinese?
Why is extreme feminism spreading in China despite Chinese women enjoying the most women's rights, safety, ability to get rich, etc?

Also, you should ask what kind of opportunity cost are they missing elsewhere.

See previous answer above.

That's what Russia and China largely did over time inside their countries.

See my response above about HK, Xinjiang, etc

China probably allows some micro pockets of that to pacify natural inner libtards.

This is only a guess. If they won't allow discusisons on Tiananmen Square, why allow pro western "liberals" a space?

 

[lube]

It's a dumb rumor, but I want to imagine the spinning little Marco will have to do for Trump.
Or would he grow a spine and resign?

 

[manqiangrexue]

@manqiangrexue

No. You don't get to redefine terms.

That is the logical definition. Only illogical people see that as a redefinition.

The definitions are clear. Hard power is transactional - offer something positive (eg money) or threaten something negative (eg pain) for a desired action. Soft power is non-transactional.

Where is that clearly written? Cite it.

That is truly a redefinition. So according to this "logic," following whichever country has the greatest hard power simply because you don't want to be on the losing side of a war is defined as following soft power?

LOL Your thinking is primitive and dysfunctional. Most of the time, the country with the hard power dominance needs speak no threat and offer no reward. Everyone knows without the nastiness that following this country will keep you on the winning side and turning against it will ruin you.

Nothing is exchanged, but a change occurs in the mind of the targets (eg radicalization), which may cause a change in behavior (eg terrorist attack). None of those Xinjiang terrorists even got weapons from the usa. They used kitchen knives, hammers, and vehicles.

This influence can only happen by infiltration, and to infiltrate a powerful country requires the hard power of funding terrorist-incitors, recruiters and providing them with the cyber platforms to communicate without interception. All hard power.

The CIA's funding, arming, and training of Tibetan separatists decades ago would be an example of hard power.

Yes...

Setting up a fake NGO / media that brainwashes people into doing desired behaviors is a textbook example of Western soft power / psychological warfare.

It's pychological warfare that costs money and takes power, all impossible without hard power backbone.

Playing fast and loose with definitions is your typical weasel tactic to confuse people.

No, my definitions are exact. That's why everything you said counts as hard power. If it cannot happen without hard power, it the same attempt made by a country without hard power would fail, then it is hard power. You are the one confused with a made-up definition of transactional vs non-transactional. If your shit was right, they'd call it non-transactional power instead of soft power.

Making everything a "nonviolent extension of hard power" allows you to "win" arguments by making up overly broad bullshit definitions that label everything as hard power.

Yeah, and it'll win this one too because everything you said relies on hard power.

Going by your "logic", everything is hard power. Even begging is hard power with your definition because begging requires bodily movement, which requires energy, which requires food, which requires money and farming tools.

Nah, you can beg for those. You can be on welfare.

bEgGiNg iS A NoN ViOlEnT ExTeNsIoN Of hArD PoWeR. Confirmed.

Retards write like this. Confirmed.

@FairAndUnbiased

No. You are using an overly broad definition. If this is true then everything is hard power.

Yeah, now you get it. It's all hard power. Except ironically, what you said in sarcasm is correct.

If we use this definition then music, movies, tv shows, video games, religion, ideology, and even memes are all hard power because they need technology, money, etc.

Well, they can be made by countries with weak hard power and they are good entertainment, but they are useless other than for making money (which can actually be translated into hard power if correctly invested). Japan and South Korea make some very popular entertainment; Thailand makes great horror movies. Who cares? If they cross any country with hard power, they're toast. Nobody in any position of power supports them.

See my reply to manqiangrexue directly above.

Crushed you again.

This is not the type of win that you think it is. The XHS situation proves several things. First, China had sufficient hard power to get soft power 10-15 years ago as I have repeatedly stated.

What does "get soft power" even mean? LOL Also, this means that you realize it takes hard power to get what you think is soft power and therefore what you think is soft power is a nonviolent extension of hard power.

Two, China's soft power department sucks.

Nah, your knowledge sucks.

Why didn't foreigners know earlier how good China was and why didn't Chinese people know how bad usa was earlier?

Because China wasn't that good early on and the US wasn't that bad! The hard power shifted and China improved substantially while the US weakened substantially.

Awful marketing by China's PR system.

Awful "logic" by you.

This is not even a soft power victory. This is more of hard power victory.

Yeah, it's totally hard power victory.

The actual soft power victory is (was) how usa duped the Chinese into thinking usa was a utopia until foreigners themselves (not Chinese PR goons) credibly exposed usa's problems. USA is NOT a utopia but duped Chinese people into believing it was AND that lead to a large percentage of them doing the West's desired behaviors (brain drained, sexpat success, trust, respect, given easy jobs, buy their over priced products/services, trust them in their supply chains, etc).

There is no soft power here. It's lag. The US used to be just that great compared to China. Then, China grew and the US stayed still/weakened until China overtook but very few people believe that without seeing it first hand. It's just lag time.

This current victory is more of a hard power victory (home ownership, safe, technology, clean, affordable).Yes, it produces soft power, but this victory is rooted in hard power.

Yup, nonviolent extension hard power as always.

To date, the west's ability to dupe is still the gold standard of psychological warfare. They are duping people with an illusion. No one was duped into liking China. They like China because of real results, especially compared to the failures of their own nation.

Chinese hard power vs lag time to realize that China had surpassed the US. No soft power anywhere.

 

[Serb]

A very good ROI. They've used the soft power + hard power 2 hit combo to take over most of the planet best lands already.

Who are you talking about here? The United States? Western colonialists (hard power industrialists)? Be more specific.

The US specifically used hard industrial power in WW1 and WW2 victories to lay the roots for hegemony, that's clear.

Instead, after they switched to soft power (for internal and external control), a few decades ago (70s deindustrialization),

They started sharply declining both internally and externally and collapsing (economic inequality, military failures).

The US predecessor - the British Empire - also used only hard industrial power to take over the globe previously.

The pattern of the Western colonial empires is this - get hegemony with hard power - waste hard power and lose it all.

They got close to overthrowing China's government in 1989.

I don't have that information, I heard that it's mostly some small percentage of urban dwellers.

Yeah, at that time they were closest to overthrowing the government, but not close overall if we look at it from a bird's eye view.

I have no idea, but Trump is a bull in a China shop right now wrecking everything.

Not just Trump dude, but the literal smartest elites with both brains and power in the US currently, Musk directly, and other tech oligarchs backing Trump. They probably realized that all that external interference had led to the core being so underinvested that it literally collapsed, inequality and polarization never higher, chances of defeating China in a war thanks to its industrial might never slimmer, etc, so they acted.

How come HK rioters killed people and did 5 billion usd in damage?
Why did Uyghur terrorists kill thousands of innocent Chinese?

What do both of these occurrences have in common? Yes, they were both squashed by China easily.

Better look at this from this perspective: How much money, resources, focus, and energy, did Westoids spend on that to end with nothing?

How come HK rioters killed people and did 5 billion usd in damage?
Why did Uyghur terrorists kill thousands of innocent Chinese?
Why is extreme feminism spreading in China despite Chinese women enjoying the most women's rights, safety, ability to get rich, etc?

That's not so much about the US, but about women's innate psychology (when paired with the modern world) that is universal everywhere in the world where there is even remote modernization.

 

[BlackWindMnt]

View attachment 145129
It's a dumb rumor, but I want to imagine the spinning little Marco will have to do for Trump.
Or would he grow a spine and resign?

What's stopping the US from interfering post Trump. I would be really disappointed if China would accept such an deal feels like it would be china's Minsk 2 deal...

But I understand if they would accept a land swap US takes Canada China recognizes it as US and China purges Taiwan of stranded western influences and the US would look the other way.