/r/geopolitics got absolutely ruined by the Asian incel population on Reddit. The same couple people would crosspost the same articles across both subreddit to get more AznIdentity and Sino dipshits (huge overlap, there) to flood the board, and because they do nothing but argue about China online, they would just overwhelm any subject matter on China with the the same regurgitated talking points from their groupthink subreddits. So like a much smaller /r/politics or /r/T_D group of losers, but much more topically focused with even more time to waste.
Russians can be very proud and strong-headed, which makes them come off as brusk and uncomprimising at first online, but I don't really blame them. I don't usually have kind things to say about the Russian government, but I can at least understand the country's mindset givern the last century. Once you show that you're not just completely regurgitating CNN, I feel like Russians will back down a bit online.
So you seem to be familiar with these things, so can I ask you about the BRI/OBOR of china. Is it as big of a game changer as everyone makes it out to be?
Uhh, that's a pretty big topic that I could give a much longer answer to if I take the time to actually put a post together. To try to summarize:
Firstly, anyone who calls anything a "game changer" in geopolitics is a dipshit. Geopolitical trends take place over the span of a decade or more. There's no such thing as a "game changer" in this kind of game. Things that people see as "game changers" are really just culminations of trends and shifts over time, and in and of themselves, are not all that significant in the grand scheme. I remember when the OBOR first hit the news cycle back in 2014. People have been calling it a "game changer" for four years. In reality, OBOR is just an extension of the CCP's manufacturing-focused economic policies, whose true purpose, albeit accelerating China's growth in the 1990s and 2000s, is to consolidate economic control in the hands of the CCP so that non-party affiliated Chinese aren't able to accrue too much power (i.e. BAT, which have fallen under the party line over the past few years).
It's no coincidence that the OBOR came about in 2013 at the height of the CCP's manufacturing glut. It serves three main purposes:
1) Give Beijing a means of influencing neighboring country politics through generous loans they know won't be paid off. This one is pretty straightforward. They can buy off neighboring countries through these loans and even if "their guy" gets the boot (like in Sri Lanka), they still have a contractually bound loan with which to hold the new administration hostage.
2) Absorb excess capacity from the massive and inefficient manufacturing/commodity sectors that the government used to accelerate growth during 1990s/2000s and then used again in 2009 to stave off the effects of the financial crisis. This allows them to maintain their pseudo-jobs programs, placate local governments (who predominantly use local real estate development as a means of gaining funds), and keep a "controlling interest", so to speak, over the Chinese economy.
3) Give China a commodities trade route over which they have far more control. China can't dream of competing with the U.S. navally in international waters for at least another three decades. If they have inland methods of transporting commodities then they are more insulated from hostile U.S. trade action. Don't believe the bullshit about this being a means for China to ship finished goods to other countries. Major Chinese companies don't give enough of a shit about international consumer markets to justify a massive program like this. They have a populace of 1.3 billion from which to profit. This is all about importing commodities and exporting intermediate and/or assembled goods.
Anyway, that's the "short" answer and its way longer than I expected it to be.
I consider the OBOR to be mainly the CPEC with some other central asian stuff tacked on because CPEC itself is the means to link Chinese infrastructure and logistics to a deep water port in the Indian ocean (which had already been built in 2007). So I would say a majority of any geopolitical impact it will have will be on Pakistan. The money they've pumped into the country alone already has a major impact. However, I don't really bother with predictions beyond 4 or 5 years, if that.
The money they've pumped into the country alone already has a major impact. However, I don't really bother with predictions beyond 4 or 5 years, if that.
So what are the short term impacts I.e for the next 4 years? I remember reading that despite CPEC pakistan will have difficulty building local industries due to the FTA they have with china.
I prefer to look at global trade balances for something like this. Who will Pakistan trade to? There's a lot of talk about China's consumer market, but its actual household final consumption as % of GDP is still just under 40%. The Chinese economy has no excess consumptive capability with which to absorb international supply because it still has so many domestic sources from which to draw cheap manufacturing. There's also the question of whether or not Pakistan's society and institutions are stable and developed enough to facilitate the kind of development that some optimists are predicting. Economic progress like that requires an educated class and a (sufficiently) effective bureaucracy. I have not kept as up to date with international events as I used to so, so I wouldn't have any answers to these questions.
i defend China all the time on geopolitics but I am not associated with aznidentity and sino. So your broad sweeping generalization is based on unfounded sterotypes.
20 comments
1 SnapshillBot 2018-08-03
Neat.
Snapshots:
I am a bot. (Info / Contact)
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2018-08-03
/r/geopolitics got absolutely ruined by the Asian incel population on Reddit. The same couple people would crosspost the same articles across both subreddit to get more AznIdentity and Sino dipshits (huge overlap, there) to flood the board, and because they do nothing but argue about China online, they would just overwhelm any subject matter on China with the the same regurgitated talking points from their groupthink subreddits. So like a much smaller /r/politics or /r/T_D group of losers, but much more topically focused with even more time to waste.
1 BoneOldSeetheAutism3 2018-08-03
Most of my online interactions with Russians have been pleasant. So were the Israelis.
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2018-08-03
Russians can be very proud and strong-headed, which makes them come off as brusk and uncomprimising at first online, but I don't really blame them. I don't usually have kind things to say about the Russian government, but I can at least understand the country's mindset givern the last century. Once you show that you're not just completely regurgitating CNN, I feel like Russians will back down a bit online.
1 BoneOldSeetheAutism3 2018-08-03
So you seem to be familiar with these things, so can I ask you about the BRI/OBOR of china. Is it as big of a game changer as everyone makes it out to be?
1 CSharpApostle 2018-08-03
What do acronym mean
1 BoneOldSeetheAutism3 2018-08-03
Belt and Road Initiative/One Belt One Road.
1 CSharpApostle 2018-08-03
Ah new silk road? Ive been hearing about that.
Thx man
1 BoneOldSeetheAutism3 2018-08-03
Yeah this guy just gave a brief explanation about it
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2018-08-03
Uhh, that's a pretty big topic that I could give a much longer answer to if I take the time to actually put a post together. To try to summarize:
Firstly, anyone who calls anything a "game changer" in geopolitics is a dipshit. Geopolitical trends take place over the span of a decade or more. There's no such thing as a "game changer" in this kind of game. Things that people see as "game changers" are really just culminations of trends and shifts over time, and in and of themselves, are not all that significant in the grand scheme. I remember when the OBOR first hit the news cycle back in 2014. People have been calling it a "game changer" for four years. In reality, OBOR is just an extension of the CCP's manufacturing-focused economic policies, whose true purpose, albeit accelerating China's growth in the 1990s and 2000s, is to consolidate economic control in the hands of the CCP so that non-party affiliated Chinese aren't able to accrue too much power (i.e. BAT, which have fallen under the party line over the past few years).
It's no coincidence that the OBOR came about in 2013 at the height of the CCP's manufacturing glut. It serves three main purposes:
1) Give Beijing a means of influencing neighboring country politics through generous loans they know won't be paid off. This one is pretty straightforward. They can buy off neighboring countries through these loans and even if "their guy" gets the boot (like in Sri Lanka), they still have a contractually bound loan with which to hold the new administration hostage.
2) Absorb excess capacity from the massive and inefficient manufacturing/commodity sectors that the government used to accelerate growth during 1990s/2000s and then used again in 2009 to stave off the effects of the financial crisis. This allows them to maintain their pseudo-jobs programs, placate local governments (who predominantly use local real estate development as a means of gaining funds), and keep a "controlling interest", so to speak, over the Chinese economy.
3) Give China a commodities trade route over which they have far more control. China can't dream of competing with the U.S. navally in international waters for at least another three decades. If they have inland methods of transporting commodities then they are more insulated from hostile U.S. trade action. Don't believe the bullshit about this being a means for China to ship finished goods to other countries. Major Chinese companies don't give enough of a shit about international consumer markets to justify a massive program like this. They have a populace of 1.3 billion from which to profit. This is all about importing commodities and exporting intermediate and/or assembled goods.
Anyway, that's the "short" answer and its way longer than I expected it to be.
1 LongPostBot 2018-08-03
OUT
OUT
OUT
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2018-08-03
ur bot is bad and u shud feel bad
1 BoneOldSeetheAutism3 2018-08-03
Ah you said than more I expected. People still call it game changer in geopolitics(or sinopolitics right now).
Hope you don't mind answering one more question. How big of an impact would OBOR be having on Pakistan's economy so to speak?
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2018-08-03
I consider the OBOR to be mainly the CPEC with some other central asian stuff tacked on because CPEC itself is the means to link Chinese infrastructure and logistics to a deep water port in the Indian ocean (which had already been built in 2007). So I would say a majority of any geopolitical impact it will have will be on Pakistan. The money they've pumped into the country alone already has a major impact. However, I don't really bother with predictions beyond 4 or 5 years, if that.
1 BoneOldSeetheAutism3 2018-08-03
So what are the short term impacts I.e for the next 4 years? I remember reading that despite CPEC pakistan will have difficulty building local industries due to the FTA they have with china.
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2018-08-03
I prefer to look at global trade balances for something like this. Who will Pakistan trade to? There's a lot of talk about China's consumer market, but its actual household final consumption as % of GDP is still just under 40%. The Chinese economy has no excess consumptive capability with which to absorb international supply because it still has so many domestic sources from which to draw cheap manufacturing. There's also the question of whether or not Pakistan's society and institutions are stable and developed enough to facilitate the kind of development that some optimists are predicting. Economic progress like that requires an educated class and a (sufficiently) effective bureaucracy. I have not kept as up to date with international events as I used to so, so I wouldn't have any answers to these questions.
1 316134 2018-08-03
You should visit /r/neoconNWO/. Its a little bit like the old geopolitics but without the eastern hordes.
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2018-08-03
I very highly doubt I would get along with neoconservatives.
1 dragonite1989 2018-08-03
i defend China all the time on geopolitics but I am not associated with aznidentity and sino. So your broad sweeping generalization is based on unfounded sterotypes.
1 UpvoteIfYouDare 2018-08-03
1) I was talking about a devoted subset of individuals. If you had actually read the content of my post, you would have known that.
2) Why are you responding to a 3-day old post?