This will slow down China's growth and make them much less of a threat.
Sometimes I wonder if this is an own-goal or whether the US uses other means to trick China into behaving stupidly.
Didn't the Soviets go from agrarian to superpower and give the US a merry chase before collapsing? This might be a long arc.
> slow down China's growth and make them much less of a threat.
If I was a dictator and the population was starting to get upset over stalled growth, starting a war would seem to be a great way to generate excuses for economic hardship and crackdowns. Oh, and it would give the factories something to do other than get undercut by Vietnam. War sounds like the answer to all of my problems. I think this situation makes me more of a threat, don't you?
> trick China into behaving stupidly
Remember, they just acquired the world's industrial base. With our encouragement, because we thought it would turn them into a liberal democracy. It, uhhh, didn't. So did we really trick them? Or did we sell them the rope with which they will hang us (to paraphrase the Lenin quote)?
Societies go to war when they think they can win and achieve political aims. Any distraction is an excuse to do something they were likely to do anyway.
Says the guy whose entire argument is "war is risky." Well, yeah -- and a ruler weighs that risk against the risk of losing legitimacy and power due to a stalling economy. This story has repeated many times in history. That's why it's a "trope."
> political aims. Any distraction is an excuse to do something they were likely to do anyway.
You don't have to read between the lines on Taiwan, you can simply read the lines.
> Didn't the Soviets go from agrarian to superpower and give the US a merry chase before collapsing? This might be a long arc.
The source for their leap "from agrarian to superpower" came from the satellite states that they had in control, and their usage of 5 year plans to accelerate growth of their heavy industries, at the sacrifice of growth in consumer-oriented industries. Nationally, the USSR was able to catch up quickly to the US after WWII, and likewise pull off some punches to publicly show their superiority in certain fields:
- Internal political resistance to the transistor & computer tech in general made them laggards when it came to alleviating bureaucratic inefficiencies. They were initially on good paces to catch up technologically with the US, but their reliance on reverse engineering & not building up their own advancements meant that the gap would inevitably widen as they'd always be playing catch up to the Western space.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnHdqPBrtH8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLOD5f-q0as
- The lack of development into the consumer-oriented industries compared to the Western sphere in general made the economies of the USSR reliant on the State to shoulder that burden, making them penultimately responsible for placating the wants of the USSR citizens.
- The below-market oil transfer agreements made to keep the USSR sphere of influence together (CMEA/Comecon) came under strain as the USSR was unable to keep growth in their oil production/exports at a consistently high rate.
Perhaps Xi is the CCP immune reaction to the risk that a freer economy would lead to a freer state.