Comments by "" (@indonesiaamerica7050) on "China Has 10 Years Left, Says Geopolitical Analyst Peter Zaihan" video.

  1. This is silly. The only thing these two "classes" have in common is trends towards looking at command economies. Every nation today has some relationship with "developing" under a command/centrally planned national macro-economy of some kind. When you start looking at differences that matter you have to look at what the schools are allowed to teach. This pundit is a Marxist materialist (or he probably regards himself as a "Realist") that doesn't understand the full spectrum of choices. Nor does he understand culture and ideology and how those things pertain to how individuals develop skills and work together in teams to create and trade things of commercial value (while also competing against symmetric and asymmetric rivals). As far as Marxist expansionism, it's all about keeping the central plan balanced and fed with resource advantages. What Marxists assume is that they have to own means of production. The long term plan is measured by increasing hegemony in measurable ways over resources and global markets. IOW, they must get their rivals to stop wanting to produce things. The whole "post industrial economy" bullshit is Marxist propaganda intended to get "advanced economies" to view themselves as beyond the need to continue "development" and simply pivot to "agents" of helping other "developing economies" take their place at the table of "global equity". Pretty much everyone knows that this is delusional. What's different from place to place is how this paradigm is expected to benefit their own local and regional groups. The entire paradigm is delusional. Planned (national macro) economies always fail. They either go away or start wars of expansion before, I assume, failing at some point by losing a way or imploding. The Cold War itself was driven by Stalin's "defensive" expansionism and ended with the internal Soviet realization that they had gained strong political control over massive resources and yet the entire system didn't work as advertised. They could not compete with the freer economies that ironically were also relying more and more on central plans. China itself was given a new life because the USA is deceived about what the New Deal did to every aspect of life in the USA. Many stupid Americans now see China as "post Communist" and putting together their own "New Deal" just like FDR! LOL! That's how stupid Marxist materialists are. The only reason the USA is still in this relatively strong (per capita GDP) is a happy accident of divided government Federalism. Without that the USA would be more France or Germany. Because all of the 'thought leaders' of the "post industrial" world think the same in Europe and the Americas. They're delusional idiots.
    1