Culture battle: Selective use of history should not be used to justify the status quo

[tequila]

Let me toss out, for discussion and possible shredding , a few observations. First, the US and its allies can, in general, schmuck any other coalition in a direct, heads on, "traditional" combat scenario. By analogy, this is similar to a fighter who can beat anyone using the Marquis of Queensbury's rules. So, having strolled down to the docks, this fighter "knows" that they can beat anyone as long as they play by the rules. So, why would anyone do that?

Taking this up to the current situation. China cannot win an all out "total war" against he US and its allies, therefore it won't fight one. The first thing it will do is attack, indirectly, the US's major strength, which happens to be economics not combat (look at WW II - the US had pretty mediocre equipment, but it had a lot of it). So, in this "hypothetical" scenario, China will encourage the shift of manufacturing away from the US and, increasingly, make the US consumers dependent upon China for their standard of living. The next step will be to create a fifth column within the US that takes advantage of the factionalization of American politics, and create major/support major lobby organizations to encourage elected officials to disregard this economic penetration. Finally, China thinks in decades and centuries, not 2 - 4 year terms, so they can afford a policy of gradually wearing away US resolve to hold certain positions. If the US threatens to "fight fair", China could, without firing a shot, induce another major depression in the entire Western world simply by dumping its US currency reserves (currently several trillion dollars) and jacking up the export duties on its manufactured goods.

This, for China, is "conventional" direct warfare (read Sun Tsu). In effect, China "gets" DIME because it has been their model of conflict for over 2500 years.

The point behind that little excursion is simple. It's not enough to maintain a strong "conventional" force or to develop a really good COIN force - these have to be integrated in such a manner that it covers and contests the DIME model of China and other models implicit in other power blocks.

Allow me to begin the shredding.

Your post appears to presume that the Chinese leadership (1) possesses nearly-omniscient foresight in economic matters (2) a long-range plan to destroy American power by displacing manufacturing out of the United States and simultaneously collecting vast sums of American dollars (3) the power and ability to do so these things over an extended period of time.

I've encountered this sort of thinking in many a forum, usually featuring paranoid nativism as the primary means of discourse, but found that it has strongest traction among people who are utterly ignorant of Chinese history, especially of the 20th century variety, don't speak, read, or know any Chinese and have had little contact with any PRC government personnel, not to mention conventional macroeconomics. For those who do know any of the latter, the idea that Beijing could possibly do any of the above three generally calls up hysterics.

They ain't that smart, and even if they were they ain't nowhere near that organized.

Frankly, Marc, you can do better than that.

[marct]

Hi Tequila,

Allow me to begin the shredding.

LOLOL.

Your post appears to presume that the Chinese leadership (1) possesses nearly-omniscient foresight in economic matters (2) a long-range plan to destroy American power by displacing manufacturing out of the United States and simultaneously collecting vast sums of American dollars (3) the power and ability to do so these things over an extended period of time.

Actually, none of these are necessary conditions for that scenario to work. Let me go through your points and show why.

1. possesses nearly-omniscient foresight in economic matters. This is unnecessary since the readily observable trend of US manufacturing and consuming interests has been quite available, and talked about in both the academic and popular press, for the past 25 years or so. The effects, in both economic and social terms, of shifting production outside of CONUS were apparent to anyone looking at the automotive industry by 1972 - think Flint Michigan.

As far as China's "awareness" or "foresight" is concerned, China still uses a rather outdated, almost paleo-Marxist, model of social development theory based on LH Morgan, JJ Bachoven and Marx in Sociology, Anthropology and Political Economy (I ave a number of friends who were trained in China). The one thing that that model does, however, stress is a production based model.

2. a long-range plan to destroy American power by displacing manufacturing out of the United States and simultaneously collecting vast sums of American dollars. They don't need a model or plan to do this, it was already being done by the Western feeding frenzy to get access to the Chinese markets. As far as the displacement of American manufacturing is concerned, this has been going on for decades. All the Chinese have to do is to recognize the trend and take advantage of the opportunity. Given that the US's trade deficit with China last year was 232.5 Billion U$ (http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/...ap4007555.html), I would point out the China doesn't "need"a long-range plan to collect vast sums of money.

Once again, there is no requirement for the Chinese government to actual plot or plan, only to recognize advantages and opportunities when they arise.

3. the power and ability to do so these things over an extended period of time. All China has to do is to a) recognize trends and b) take advantage of them, which is something that is, IMO, quite likely. Furthermore, it doesn't have to be the Chinese government that "orchestrates" any of this. The concept of "mutual arising" may well be at play here with the government playing of the economic success of the southern areas, especially Shanghai.

They ain't that smart, and even if they were they ain't nowhere near that organized.

They don't have to be . Frankly, when you look at what is going on in China itself, including the cultural stress and strain between the north and the south, economic dislocations, etc., China is actually quite fragile (somewhat analogous to the US in the 1850's). This certainly hasn't stopped the government from playing off on the opportunities they have handed to them on a silver platter.

Let me ask you a question: what do you think the effects would be in the US of a trade war with China?

Marc