Being negative about Xi might have similar results, but less likely in practice.
It's hard for me to come up with a standard that encourages trade with China but discourages trade with North Korea. I'm not saying that trade with the US is therefore a good idea. There are many reasonable moral standards that would forbid trade with both the US & China.
I've been to China, and I'm going again this year, I'm from the EU. The funniest thing is that China's Tier 1 cities are more developed than EU cities and offer a better quality of life.
States use the "morality" argument when they need to build a narrative and portray someone as bad/evil to justify actions against them, while the real reason is almost always geopolitical interests or money/resources.
Not to mention the US and China use similar “low level” indoctrination strategies (like swearing allegiance to the flag in schools)
Being negative about Xi has typically much worse in consequence and closer cooperation with China might make it more likely in practice. I'm not saying countries should not cooperate with China, just that your argument is not that great.
There's a game being played that, once you see it, it becomes clear that some world leaders are thinking about 2035, and other world leaders are still in 2015. I don't like it, and I genuinely feel for Canadians; they're a small, inconveniently positioned pawn that is getting caught up in something so much bigger than their country and leadership has the resources to deal with.
Edit: Since I'm throttled... Trump has been talking about Greenland since 2019, before he was surrounded with the current crop. Good try at keeping the 4D chess con going though.
Or he's been looking at a Mercator map projection and thinks Greenland is waaay bigger than it is.
Fortunately I'm from New Zealand and we've been hiding off of maps for years because security by obscurity is effective against some opponents... We've even pretended it is a conspiracy against us as chaff.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omission_of_New_Zealand_from_m...
Nice article that shows a Risk map (with a big important Greenland) and no New Zealand.
If someone told Trump that Quebec is full of Frenchies, maybe the rest of Canada could palm that problem off onto the US?
Interesting, and what are the larger stakes? What good do you see in the 4th dimension? Can we be a tad more specific, just as much as necessary to avoid sounding like stargazers detached from reality.
>>> However, turning away from the US (~85% of Canadian trade) to China (~8%) weakens Canada and gives political cover for the US to take further hostile action.
Maybe it's news to you, but Canada didn't "turn away from the US", the current US admin turned away from Canada, despite prior agreements like USMCA.
Further, is forcing Canada to implement unfavorable trade with the US and unfavorable restrictions to China worth the risk of the US becoming a self-isolated island of no freedoms and low standard of living?
Whatever Canada does, they aren't going to make the US rich or solve our problems - they aren't the source of those problems. However, China can replace the US as Canada's top trade partner fairly quickly and without straining their economy.
Ditto, for the rest of the world replacing the dollar with other instruments, the process has already started thanks to the erratic and shortsighted policies of Trump's admin.
>>> There's a game being played that, once you see it,
I see it fairly clearly and there's nothing good for the US in it, nether now nor in 2035.
>>> it becomes clear that some world leaders are thinking about 2035, and other world leaders are still in 2015.
So, we're supposed to wait for the bright future (tm) and accept whatever lunatic actions are undertaken before that? Suspend reason, common sense... and the Constitution because the bright future demands it?
> Trump has a pattern of being a voicebox for whatever was said by the last person who talked to him.
Well, following the note-written plan of person R one day, of person V the next and of person M the day after, isn't going to generate anything other than an incoherent mess of a policies, the empirical evidence is in full agreement here.
Then, what if the last person who talked to him is being a voicebox for the last person who talked to the last person who talked to him? Where would that get us?
The endgame we're in now is the sunset of the anthropocene. We're less-than one generation away from wholesale human labor automation. Good will and trade relationships with other countries are inconsequential. All that matters, literally from the perspective of "the good of your people", is having the foundations in place to participate in the automation explosion that is already happening; or being a forever-serf to the countries that do (at best).
Sadly, there is no "opt-out" button in this game.
This statement both denies and confirms my previous comment. So, which one is it? Should we give up all hope for the bright future or wait for the nebulous "green paths" with a baited breath while surrendering everything we value?
If MAGA stands for "Don't wait for the Bright Future" it should be re-lettered as an acronym, ditto if it stands for "Surrender Your Values and Wait for the Tiny Green Paths".
I'm afraid to ask about the nature of the TGPs lest I get directed to watch for secret signs to appear in the Orion Nebulae.
Just how far can demagogy go? And I'm not blaming you, you are simply channeling the conflicted messaging of MAGA GOP.
> We're less-than one generation away from wholesale human labor automation.
In a normal world that would be The Bright Future, it would take planned and evil actions to destroy it and turn it into something bad for everyone.
> All that matters, literally from the perspective of "the good of your people", is having the foundations in place to participate in the automation explosion that is already happening; or being a forever-serf to the countries that do (at best).
Now we get to fear becoming "serfs" in the times of "wholesale human labor automation" which, of course, doesn't need any serfs.
And how do you "participate in the automation explosion" by non-participating in the existing international division of labor? Without a shadow of doubt, if we (the US) used China for the importation of cheap commodities, we'd achieve the automation thing much faster and with much less risk. It's simple economics.
Conversely, not participating and rallying the world around China, carries the risk of them getting ahead and we being left behind... and isolated.
My major problem with MAGA GOP is their brazen disregard for reason, logic and decency, something that could indeed turn the wonders of AI into a tragedy for the US and humanity as a whole. Their strategy is maximum damage to China at any cost for the US and that doesn't make sense at all.
Your problem with MAGA is their disregard for reason, logic, and decency. Logic and Reason can only be assessed if you understand the full game that is being played. We, as citizens, certainly do not. As for decency; I would place high probability on decency being negatively correlated with the United States having a successful time in the next few decades. In times of chaos, decency is not something to hold in high regard.
The last ship for that sailed when the Tiananmen massacre happened without any consequences to the PRC government.
The first opportunity to have saved pain would have been to fully back Chiang Kai-Shek and have put down Mao’s rebellion - when China would have had the most ability to be reformed.
If we extend the scope to US allies, the last opportunity would have been for the UK to keep Hong Kong British beyond 1997 - versus letting China renege on its promises.
What about when they join the EU?
The US is just less trustworthy at this point, at least we know china's goal better.
Note: both under the current administration
It’s hard to build an alliance when one of the partners flips their fundamental goals every 4 years.
W. and Blair were in cahoots wrt Iraq.
Start with Jan. 28, 2003 State of the Union address, Bush's 16 words: “The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.” and go from there.
Leaked British documents: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Iraq_document_leak
Bush–Blair 2003 Iraq memo : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush–Blair_2003_Iraq_memo
September Dossier: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_Dossier
Chilcot Report: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Inquiry
> That the next republican president [...] is a continuation of the theme.
Leaving out EU part, I agree with the continuation. W. commuted the prison sentence of Scooter Libby (convicted of obstruction for interfering with an investigation the bush admin outed a CIA operative in retribution for her husband being outspoken that the intelligence that lead to Iraq where "twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat"). Trump fully pardoned him in 2018. Also, we have Bushism's and Trumpism's. It's uncanny how George W. was like a beta version of the full featured Trump Gold release. Both are/were figureheads that had people running them, the hanging chads 2000 election kerfuffle-fraud in Florida (of all places) that lead to SCOTUS appointing W. as president etc; it's almost as if that deep state maga likes to talk about is real.
Current administration is just bat shit crazy and hungry for personal gain.
This started with Trump and Project 2025 and whatever the tea party mixes in there.