well end up like japan which is doing perfectly fine for itself. we will maintain our homogeneity which is why korea and japan are first world while china is not imo
Date: November 15th, 2016 1:57 AM Author: Puce parlor
retarded argument.
the soviet union had a greater level of centralization and ultimately got pwned by the u.s. its political system was a lot more brittle, too, and did not allow for significant change without the risk of revolution or dissolution.
the beauty of american capitalism is that it allows human flourishing by channeling self interest in productive ways. our system of government, cultural norms, and civic society restrain power and work against rent-seeking behavior by elites, albeit imperfectly. the well-established democratic process allows conflicts to be resolved in peaceful ways, making the political system more robust in the long run.
Date: November 15th, 2016 2:24 AM Author: Orange excitant state
counterpoint, soviet union ran a command economy whereas china has adopted capitalism (with socialist characteristics). it's a bubble that will inevitably crash as well but still very different than the soviet model.
Date: November 15th, 2016 5:42 PM Author: lascivious dead heaven wrinkle
the USSR was a frankenstein's monster of a "nation." it was constantly plagued by would-be separatist movements and troublesome backwards tribes/groups. it had to knit together a giant spectrum of linguistic, ethnic, and religious groups. it was never 90% of anything like china is 90% han.
it's actually a miracle the USSR lasted as long as it did, but LOL @ a non-centralized system accomplishing nearly as much on that particular landmass. how does the lack of strong centralization work out for the congo or something?
Date: November 15th, 2016 2:18 AM Author: vigorous salmon headpube filthpig
china is the biggest strategic threat to our leading super power status since WWII and is an actual real threat unlike the Soviets who were doomed to fail from the start
but china has serious inefficiencies in its economic system due to the state picking winners and losers not to mention its lack of any cultural soft power. finally china doesn't attract the smartest of the world like US so we will have the technological edge for the foreseeable future
Date: November 15th, 2016 2:27 AM Author: Orange excitant state
china has 1.4 billion people and 12 million with genius level IQs. they have no shortage of bright people. they are expanding their soft power through the one belt one road initiative and relations with central asia and africa. they've established various asian organizations like ASEAN, SCO, Asian Infrastructure Bank, etc to counteract western institutions. they're no dummies.
Date: November 15th, 2016 2:37 AM Author: vigorous salmon headpube filthpig
all the stuff you mentioned has nothing to do with cultural soft power. american cultural soft power is not due to world bank or IMF but due to hollywood, fashion, music, way of life etc
yes i know their human potential which is why i said they are a real and serious threat. they have almost everything - size, national vigor/cohesion, IQ. though their aging population will be a huge drag along with their highly inefficient banking/economic system
but still i will bet on US as long as US is at least 50% white
Date: November 15th, 2016 2:54 AM Author: Orange excitant state
didn't see the cultural part. I was thinking more of the basic definition of soft power as "the ability to attract and co-opt rather than by coercion (hard power), using force or giving money as a means of persuasion." those orgs i mentioned get no play in western media bc they're inconvenient facts that diminish the western ego.
i also don't really see the benefits of cultural soft power unless it achieves some end for america, whether diplomatically or economically.