[conspire] (OT) geopolitics
Steve Litt
slitt at troubleshooters.com
Sun Apr 30 22:36:28 PDT 2023
Rick Moen said on Sun, 30 Apr 2023 20:50:58 -0700
>Quoting Steve Litt (slitt at troubleshooters.com):
>
>[
>https://ecumenico.org/the-myth-of-multipolarity-american-powers-staying-power-stephen-g-brooks-april-2023-foreign-affairs
>]
>
>> I don't know the history of Rick's and Ruben's debate, but the
>> preceding link's article is 5000 words that parse down to nothing.
>> The phony intellectual author passionately argues both sides of
>> every point.
>
>You will probably be unsurprised to hear that I don't concur.
I'm very surprised Rick. You and I have never disagreed on anything
before.
>
>
>I don't particularly care who qualifies as an "intellectual", but will
>mention without further comment that Stephen G. Brooks is a very
>resepected academic, currently Prof. of Government at Dartmouth, Ph.D.
>from Yale, expert in international relations, the global political
>economy, and American strategy. So, if he's a phony intellectual, I
>sure hope some day to meet the towering polymath who, by you, _isn't_
>one.
Then maybe he needs to take a writing course so his ability to
communicate is on par with his other abilities.
>More to the direct point, I cannot see him having "argued both sides of
>every point" (passionately or not).
Paragraphs 1-4 were about America in the 90's and early this century.
Paragraphs 5-9 argue for the world now being multipolar.
Paragraphs 10-12 argue that the world isn't multipolar, with the US
supreme.
The following quote from paragraph 11: "No longer can one pick any
metric to see this reality, but it becomes clear when the right ones
are used." Well yeah, if I get to cherry pick my metrics I can prove
that smoking does no harm and global warming/climate change isn't a
problem.
>
>Brooks's main point is the one he gets to directly, which is to debunk
>the currently fashionable notion that we've entered an era of
>"multipolar" geopolitics. He points out that this is false by every
>credible metric of either hard or soft power, but that the metric that
>has mattered most post-Cold War is "resources, especially military
>might and economic heft".
[snip]
>The reason I brought this essay to (specifically) Ruben's attention is
>that he shares his far-right MAGA crowd's fixation with the alleged
>imminent national threat of China, and I keep trying (and failing) to
>give him some broader and better-informed perspective from actual
>experts who are not just spewing ideology.
I have to agree with Ruben on this. Here are a few of the credible
metrics I see:
* China is closing the economy gap with the US:
https://www.investopedia.com/insights/worlds-top-economies/
* China and/or Russia could totally cripple the US with a fission bomb
a hundred or so miles above South Dakota or somewhere similar. I
think North Korea currently has that capability, and for all I know
Iran might also. It remains to be seen how much of the US retaliatory
force survives that. Notice the "90% casualties" upper range figure in
https://www.forbes.com/sites/arielcohen/2023/03/20/deflating-the-emp-danger-to-americas-power-grids/?sh=3acf2bd20508
Semiconductors won't survive, and the US depends the most on
semiconductors. This fact doesn't yield much confidence in a unipolar
world.
* The US produces very few semiconductors anymore. China has far
outstripped the US in the ability to set up chip factories. The US
hasn't been in that business in a big way, for years. The US won WWII
because we could build so many ships and planes. Without
semiconductors, we no longer have that ability. The US is toast if
China cuts off our chips. This fact doesn't yield much confidence in
a unipolar world.
* I'm not saying this trend can't be stopped, but the US is currently
headed toward either a dictatorship or a second civil war. Either
would reduce the US both economically and militarily. This fact
doesn't yield much confidence in a unipolar world.
SteveT
Steve Litt
Autumn 2022 featured book: Thriving in Tough Times
http://www.troubleshooters.com/bookstore/thrive.htm
More information about the conspire
mailing list