@DaseindustriesLtd's banner p

DaseindustriesLtd

late version of a small language model

78 followers   follows 28 users  
joined 2022 September 05 23:03:02 UTC

Tell me about it.


				

User ID: 745

DaseindustriesLtd

late version of a small language model

78 followers   follows 28 users   joined 2022 September 05 23:03:02 UTC

					

Tell me about it.


					

User ID: 745

How would a formal request for a ban not be a toddler-fit in this framing? I am simply saying that I do not intend to change my behavior. You are offered to price it in and act accordingly.

I'm not a wounded party, I am simply correct and you are wrong, particularly in this case.

China is on a roughly South Korean demographic trajectory. I think their population will fall even faster than pessimistic UN predictions. To what extent that matters, I am not sure. They'll probably have an advantage in workforce with tertiary education over the entirety of the "developed world" for the next two-three decades, by which point labor may become irrelevant. If the problem were the lack of labor in the shorter term, we wouldn't be seeing increasing youth unemployment while productivity keeps ballooning. (The absence of it in eg Japan is not so much about better economy or more advanced stage of demographic transition as about cultural mandate for low productivity of service employment; China isn't willing to subsidize that many bullshit jobs and Chinese graduates are not willing to take full-time low status menial jobs, they'd rather live on parents' savings and do gigs). At this rate of automation, I expect nations will become more preoccupied with reducing population, and China will be one of the most automated and the fastest-shrinking societies, so optimistically it'll cancel out. Then there is the political issue of aging; I am pessimistic about the culture and politics of old societies. Homogeneity and lack of politically significant subgroups with markedly different productivity (as in the US with its racial spoils system) at least reduce the tension.

As of now though, Chinese government is the most vigorous of all I know in trying to boost fertility, they're running policy experiments across provinces and have some results. If all goes well, they may pull back to 1.1-1.2 TFR, and I expect the productive subgroups of the West to naturally stabilize around the same point.

I'm answering tersely because I'm expecting a permaban, as requested.

Ya know, it's really obnoxious to keep telling people what their ethno-nationalist origins are, and when corrected, double down

No. This is gaslighting plain and simple, so I won't read the rest of your screed. I'm tired of this nonsense. Ban me at least for a month, better permaban.

On the object level.

We have many Chinese and non-Chinese people here who have relevant fresh experience and diverse takes, eg here. He apparently doesn't have Chinese nationality, and it's not clear he's ever had it; more importantly not clear whether he's been there in any recent past, or indeed even once – I asked and he avoided the issue. That is obnoxious. He's opportunistically claiming to be "Chinese" in this chain to legitimize sweeping dismissive statements on what China is like addressed to a "foreigner", but ordinarily he says he's "Canadian", showing he's a foreigner himself. This is hypocrisy. He shares some psychodrama about [white] Canadian treatment of ethnic Chinese, which is irrelevant to the issue at hand – I have zero interest in his ethnic background or identity, we're talking about knowledge, not HBD and legacy. Han Chinese people do not have any essentialist property that allows them to be more insightful about China than any other "foreigner", that's my assertion. And you're trying to frame me as… well, whatever.

He's very reluctant to clarify that, so I think he's either second gen or a Hong Konger.

I am Chinese. I have Canadian citizenship, but that makes me no more a Canadian than a dog born in a stable a horse. And my countrymen see me in this way, as well.

My condolences. Racism is horrible.

On the object level, if you're born "in a stable", if your countrymen are Canadians, if you're a Canadian of Chinese ancestry – I repeat, it's not clear what your claim to knowing anything about China of 2026 is. You are a foreigner for the PRC, as am I.

Okay, and that's what Trump is doing because he believes (rightly or wrongly) America doesn't need allies and supplicants, and you're bitching about that?

What is this, just face-saving? The conceptual difference is that the US already has an alliance network, so it makes no sense to just dismantle it, even at cost. But, like, I'm not really "bitching", I'm okay with it, go on. I'm not sure what's better for me in the end, because one important variable is how the desperation dynamics affects the severity of American chimpouts, and I don't have a model for it.

The practical difference is that without allies, within 3-5 years you cease being anything remotely like a peer power to China. It's just unserious to talk about. It's not only a matter of industrial scale, brainpower and state capacity (China outclassing the US in each), it's that they are a near-autarky, and half of your advanced economy including the MIC is dependent on allied supply chains (a fact obscured by relative share of trade in GDP, but a true one). Obviously this means that even Trump's USA is unlikely to torpedo the current system, but it's worth keeping in mind the alternative.

They hate the Japanese, what do you imagine they think of India?

They think vastly better of India, Russia, America and cockroaches than of the Japanese. You have no clue what you're talking about if that's your argument.

is that they consider these territories as already belonging to them. Can't be a superpower if you're just taking back your own property.

And indeed Tibet is internationally recognized Chinese clay. The territorial claims of the PRC are consistent since before the formation of the PRC and only were scaled down over time. CIA-supported governments in exile do not inherently override governments of nation states. "Free Tibet" is some vintage psyop, I'm sort of confused to still see it. Maybe we'll feel this way about Gaza in a few decades.

Replying to some of your other comments here, why the obsession with Marvel and funko pops?

I think that's representative of the level of American cultural development. Ne Zha 2 is also representative of China (it's high production value slop).

Next - some significant fraction of Chinese can talk intelligently about the lakers or European football. How many Americans have heard of Lin Dan or Shi Yuqi?

Again. What of it? Are you saying that the Canadian pivot is because they've become fans of Lin Dan? My thesis is not that the Chinese soft power is very deep (though in some segments it's growing, and it'll help product sales etc.), it's that the popularity of your national media does not translate into political allegiance. That's not how the causality flows. America did not become the Shining City Upon a Hill and the leader of the strongest military alliance in history by producing popular media slop, it's just one of the many facets of their current eminence. Great Britain's greatest media days were after the British Empire collapsed. Hong Kong out-soft-powered all of China, their content was popular in the Mainland, they still got crushed and now they pitifully complain in the UK to stop the construction of the Mega-Embassy. It's all a very big attention sink, but a very minor factor, at the end of the day.

And indeed, an overwhelming superiority in cultural exports can even undermine you. What good did BLM protests in Chelyabinsk do for the USA? Brainrotten Russian teenagers may hunt for signs of racism at home, but they know where Saint Floyd perished, and won't buy into the more carefully curated myth of Jeans, Bubblegum and Freedom like their parents did. It's actually pretty hard to have both a vibrant and a propagandistically coherent cultural scene. The dividends on having everyone just use your memes, your frameworks, your critiques, live in your world, are… unclear to me. Something something master's tool master's house? Sorry, I'm not that Kendi yet.

What was your point again?

Seriously, though. You should go back to making fun of teenage girls from San Francisco tweeting 'defund the police.' The crowd loves it. Make a patreon and gofundme, some Thiel acolyte with deep pockets will buy you a Trump Gold Card

You have no idea how little this pitiful anklebiting attempt (or whatever it was) stings. I have no need to seek or beg or whore myself out, and I could come to the US any time I wanted, welcomed and accommodated, within the last 2 years.

Pleasuring the North American crowd is beneath me. I only talk of what I find interesting. Sometimes I get carried away.

I perceive integration with Europe one of the major sources of my subordination.

No matter which way net subordination actually flows, maybe it's time for a peaceful divorce then.

No, you are a Canadian, you self-identify as one except for the purposes of making this «as a Chinese» take, and it appears we'd both be foreigners in the PRC.

I've given you a vast attack surface, but you're turtling up because you have no comeback. From your post here it's clear you don't have any extra insider knowledge, it's just old memes any white guy with yellow fever could come up with. I

Nothing you've said changes that in practice, on the ground, Chinese cultural exports, political engagement and geopolitics don't work. I use the phrase "uncharismatic" but sub in "ineffective" or whatever you need. China has no allies, nobody likes what they produce, and nobody likes what they say. China got rich building things that were invented by westerners. Not by producing novel goods that everybody loves.

This is just kanging that gets produced in a terminally ill society that's running out of a things to boast of and so points to legacy and accumulated prestige. Nobody cares anymore for what the ingenious whites claim to have invented, sorry to say, that's a very boomer-coded thing in a very non-white and industrial world. This is the kind of thing that «everybody loves» in 2026.

Concretely, China gets from the EU, for starters:

  • 300 billion euro a year in pure trade surplus
  • technologies like Nexperia (the Dutch tried to take it back on, apparently, American orders, found out they have no leverage, folded, then there were very interesting hearings on Karremans), KUKA and Idra
  • engineers educated in top Western schools and companies, like Lin Nan, to accelerate their research.
  • growing FDI, one German plant closes in Germany – one opens in the Inner Mongolia
  • non-recognition of Taiwanese sovereignty, absence of any coordination to act against them if they mode
  • some amount of intelligence gathering
  • Macron and others shilling for JVs and more cooperation, up to breaking the semiconductor blockade, which means betraying an existential interest of their very scary and important suzerain.
  • Unwillingness/inability of Europe to do anything against them, even as they supply advanced military technology like laser point defense systems to Russia, for testing and geopolitical hijinks.

What China does not get: military bases in Europe, even though the US (still has bases in Europe) has been rude lately while they're nice and only formally Communists, anything about "alliance".

I think they're fine with this trade.

You agreed the world would cut ties with China and back the USA.

I guess I need to make it clearer for you. I said that the world will do nothing substantial, nothing beyond symbolic handwringing, unless China actually loses the war. It'll be treated by Europe (nevermind Russia, Africa, India, LatAm, Middle East…) about as seriously as the Israeli war/genocide, or less than that: condemnations + weapons contracts.

Mind you, it's if there is any war, which there likely won't be as the US will retreat and Taiwan just fold.

You got embarrassed because your foundational premise was wrong. Next time, just say "lol my bad. I still think Americans exhibit this behaviour"

It's not my foundational premise that you're an American. My "foundational premise" is that your beliefs are representative of Americans and I think they're wrong.

and I wouldn't even have engaged

I didn't mind you engaging initially, I thought you might go beyond "uncreative bugmen low EQ" cope mixed with geopolitical concern trolling.

Notably, none of this has any relation to «cultural exports» which you started with in your argument about WWIII alliances, so I assume you've quietly conceded the point.

Still, I think this is cope and embarrassing narrative peddling.

They have terrible diplomacy, sure. Just like they have terrible propaganda. But you're desperately trying to shoehorn trade deals into the form of alliance building. I believe they genuinely expected that dysfunctional African or Oceanian states can be a good investment and grow even at a fraction of their speed. You're imagining that all those BRI projects are some very long, awkward, failed foreplay to a military alliance. I'd need to see actual Chinese proposals to this effect to believe it. Papua New Guinea signs defense treaty with Australia. Is this really a big deal? China has a profitable bilateral relationship with Australia as such.

Wolf warrior diplomacy is commonly understood to have been an appeal to domestic audience in the age of social media, like bizarre American behaviors are.

It goes without saying that CCP members saying "We come in peace" can be regarded with some skepticism.

And yet your only scenario for the war is «South China Sea». They are openly saying they intend to take Taiwan, «easy way or the hard way», in Trumpspeak. This is what that navy is primarily for, as well as other assets in the theater – overmatch against any conceivable allied fleet. Is it common among «analysts» to interpret it as the first step to world domination?

Your analysts must be trying too hard. People usually mean what they say.

I guess your kind of jaded analysts who don't believe propaganda, all these think tank morons with Chinese characters in Twitter handles, who have lived in China long enough to infer menacing signals from how many cups are before Xi, also analyzed Chinese Miscalculation last October, when they Showed Their Hand and Revealed Being A Bad Actor Before the World, Inviting American Retaliation. Do you remember that phase? I do, the entire Analyst Community, people like Greer, Doshi, they were unanimous that China just can't into diplomacy and blundered to save face again, or it was a rogue MOFCOM or MSS agent, or that the Analysts (and Bessent) need to publicly insist on this to give Xi «face» when he rolls export controls back, etc. etc, all this condescending and ignorant garbage from a position of control. How has that worked out? The US was the one miscalculating, Xi never had to save face, Trump fumed a bit and went to Busan to ask for a ceasefire, and that was that. And then Korea signed on to the currency swap with China. In general, for all that they're failing in diplomacy, the decoupling from them is going very poorly indeed.

Yeah so let me reiterate: even in your most motivated, pro-China reasoning, you cannot envision a world that doesn't immediately freeze trade with China and pray to god that Trump fixes it. We both conclude

No, I do not permit you to «reiterate». No, we do not both conclude. I didn't say that, your rephrasing is a retarded American fantasy. Why do you need to do this? Just directly mock what I actually say, if you would be so kind.

I meant more like «Macron freezes those optically significant FDI projects he's been begging China for in Davos». Not even trade with Russia is totally frozen. You're delusional if you believe Europe reacts stronger to Taiwan because «China cannot into diplomacy» and ultimately «China bad media exports». All those lurid images are completely detached from the scenario I mentioned.

So... what's your actual criticism of my previous post? You made a whole new post to attack my previous one, but when it comes down to it, you agree I'm right. What's going on here?

I suppose what is going on here is that, at least for the purposes of this debate, you're incapable of communicating in plain language, and it's obnoxious of you to pretend to, so I won't cooperate.

It's an indictment on Chinese culture that we can have an international community that is absolutely aghast at the US diplomatic and cultural engagement right now. But exactly zero rich, first world nations, are seriously discussing swapping alliances to China.

Have you considered that the major cultural «defect» here is simply that China is not offering alliances to anyone? That they have strictly one ally, and that ally is Pakistan, which they use solely to keep India distracted? That they believe, and perhaps reasonably, that they do not need any allies or supplicants to achieve what they want? They don't even try to arm Iran. They are watching Russia and Ukraine bleed, and calmly sell weapons to both sides, and lobby for more EVs in the EU. They did not bother to loudly condemn American aggression towards Greenland, just reiterated the commitment to the UN Charter and asked to not be used as a pretext. They don't care.

NATO was not formed at the behest of smaller nations; it was a deliberate American project of expanding the US-UK alliance network in the face of the very credible and loudly proclaimed Soviet expansionism. You are talking as if China is proposing a counter-NATO security bloc a la the Warsaw Pact, and is being rejected because Wukong is an inadequate counter to Spiderman. Tell me, had the Soviets wooed the world with their high culture? Was it Rachmaninoff or Tarkovski that kept Czhechoslovakia tethered, or perhaps the Strugatsky brothers? No, it was a crude ideology and the threat of violence. During Mao's era, Chinese culture was incomparably more ghoulish and impoverished than it is now, and yet they had a far greater global reach. Maoism still finds some purchase among American intellectuals – with no input from Beijing.

What you confirm to me is that for a Westerner it's largely pointless to study China. All that expertise, just to play a glass bead game with your starting priors.

Not sure if you've studied this, but the official Chinese position on the matter of great power politics is:

Deng noted in this speech that China should state clearly to the world that "China is not a superpower, nor will she ever seek to be one. If one day China should change her color and turn into a superpower, if she too should play the tyrant in the world, and everywhere subject others to her bullying, aggression and exploitation, the people of the world should identify her as social-imperialism, expose it, oppose it and work together with the Chinese people to overthrow it." These words were endorsed by Chairman Mao Zedong and put into the speech in their entirety.

[…] On December 1, 2017, at the opening ceremony of the CPC in Dialogue with World Political Parties High-level Meeting, President Xi Jinping reiterated China's commitment of never seeking hegemony or expansion no matter what stage of development it reaches. China will neither "import" models from other countries nor "export" the Chinese model or ask other countries to copy the Chinese practice.

This is a pledge China made to the international community and the code of conduct for international relations that it has always followed. Despite changes in the international landscape, China's commitment to "never seek hegemony" has never changed, and its original aspiration to "uphold peace" has never wavered. China has honored its words, as a major country is expected to do. China has not and will never betray the solemn commitment it made to the world at the United Nations.

Obviously the lofty rhetoric about never bullying smaller states may sound very quaint now. But the philosophy, I think, is straightforwardly upheld. They do not intend to act as a superpower no matter how strong they get. They consider it a distraction.

If a ship gets sunk in the SCS tomorrow, the free world holds their nose and rallies under the freedom eagle in 5 minutes flat. Are you disputing that

Yes, I am. I think the «free world» makes concerned noises, cancels some trade deals, and politely offers Trump to sort it out or whatever. The French are not going to lose their entire fleet (which they may need to defend from American aggression, as they have known for a while) in the South China Sea. Had the «free world» truly cared about preventing Chynese domination, it wouldn't have traded the recognition of Taiwanese sovereignty for the privilege of investing into the Mainland economy.

In any case, when those 49K Chinese EVs arrive to Canada, we'll see what soft power with Chinese characteristics looks like in a rich first world nation.

No. You admit being Canadian, perhaps of Chinese ethnicity. Maybe a Taiwanese or a Hong Konger at that, given how you specify not getting into fights with «Mainland» Chinese here. And I do not know when you've last been to Mainland China and how long you've lived in Canada, but you write like an Indian, with the over-the-top emotive rhetorical flourish and confident pride in your eloquence that I have never seen a Mainland-educated person display in English (then again I could be accused of much the same). You might even believe this alone makes you better than them, you assimilated so well after all, and the Chinese are known for strong internal racism. However, I'll allow that you're probably a first-generation immigrant, seeing as how you attack fellow immigrants and give them this boomerish no-nonsense advice on fitting in. You are also not particularly informed about the conditions of either American or Chinese economy, given that we've seen a spectacular refutation of your June thesis («The American economy is not dependent on imports from China») here with the October MOFCOM Surprise that forced the US into a humiliating climbdown. I'd say >5 years since last stay in China. Right? The idea I'm seeing among people routinely doing business with China, the knowledge of Chinese way of life is completely obsolete within about 5 years.

More generally, I put extremely little faith in «I'm from X and here's the ugly truth» type takes, ironic as that is, given that I'm sometimes providing such opinions on Russia. Many people are dissatisfied in the condition of their nation; those are the Russians saying they're inept orcs and the frontline will crumble in two weeks, the Americans complaining of their intolerable wage slavery to the middle-class Shanghainese on Rednote, and of course the Chinese who've internalized the more charismatic white narrative about their inferiority, or just grew dismayed of the grift and striverism. But many Chinese including my friends in various walks of life and in different countries hold views opposite to yours; and many Chinese outside China are straightforwardly coping, starting with their patron saint Gordon Chang and the COVID refugee cohort that had accepted a permanent QoL hit in emigration and thus sustains itself with news of the coming Chinese collapse. Whereas most Chinese dissidents, in my experience, are straight up mentally ill (excluding eg. Ai Weiwei), and there's no talking to them. I've visited a local Falun Dafa branch, the food was okay, but my takeaway was «wow, if the MSS ran this thing, they'd find little to improve for the purposes of lulling the US into complacency». That's the nervous system of the overseas anti-CCP Chinese and much of the Western conservative media, their newspapers informing Republican policymaking – a hive of loudly insane religious freaks who couldn't cut it in China. It had put some things into perspective for me.

It's also quite condescending to assume that a foreigner, one from a former Communist country at that, is naively engaging with «tightly controlled PR». Your homeland's PR is hilariously tone-deaf and transparent; if the MSS or whatever were employing people like me, they'd get much further, but they treat propaganda as a sinecure for officials' failsons. My opinion is based on primary sources, not on «PR». I can literally see who's doing what, with what dependencies, with what labor, and the Chinese are doing about 50% of the interesting stuff in the world, delivering us the world that's moving forward twice as fast.

Please explain why you believe the communists in China are more trustworthy partners that the Americans.

Mainly because the average quality of Americans and the Chinese doesn't matter so much – institutions that serve as the bottlenecks do. The CCP imposes some standards of competence and prosociality, as opposed to the American beauty pageant, and Xi in particular is like 3 standard deviations above Trump in personal integrity, which has effects downstream. Xi's ministers are humans, Trump's are weird hypebeasts; Xi's policies are motivated by long-term rational self-interests, Trump's by petty cruelty and delusions, therefore the Chinese in aggregate become more predictable and more reliable partners. This is trivially obvious to a neutral observer from going through their biographies and watching their actions, and actions of both countries, for several years.

If I were a Maoist Third Worldist, I would not be saying that China is not really Communist.

In my opinion it has not come to a close at all. If you think Trump just gets to TACO, pretend he's always wanted a "deal" and go back to the status quo with no repercussions, you're very… optimistic. These trade arrangements with China or security ones with India are not a bluff, the entire American worldview on this is completely delusional and self-serving. The EU, just like China, isn't doing deals to posture or to impress or intimidate Americans, it's trying to improve its currently grim long-term trajectory, and American nonsense is telling them what to avoid. We have learned a useful thing, too – that Trump can be deterred with economic consequences even in the absence of any military capability.

That I, a non-American, had to make the top level post was evidence enough that it's of secondary interest at best.

America is a lot like Russia. It sees itself as the defender of Europe and the bulwark of European values.

Well Russia is also clearly divergent from the «Western Civilization» the central example of which is obviously Western Europe, eg France. In the most divergent dimensions, Russians are just living the way Europeans did 200 years ago, and that's enough to be seen as basically a species of non-human vermin and infinitely more distant than the Japanese or Koreans. People are massively sensitive to morally coded deviations, but big structural differences don't necessarily register. Dealing with an «alien civilization», so long as it's at all functional, is not psychologically harder than dealing with a «wayward cousin».

I'll be very impressed if this gets sold to the allies as «miscommunication». It looks like he just bluffed, then took stock of the actual ROI on the attempted attack and got cold feet, as during the rare earths spat with China earlier.

I do not care what you find interesting or not, nor do I find your attempts at psychologizing insightful. China is roughly half of effective humanity on most important metrics, so it is more rational – even for Americans, or perhaps especially for Americans – to be «obsessed» with them than with petty dramas of American social decay, like a low-IQ enforcer killing a twitchy activist or the other way around, some state-level DEI/anti-DEI regulation imbroglio, a slapfight, a shooting, a bill, a parochial religious disagreement, or any other of our usual topics. Thinking about this from first principles, American prestige is insanely inflated. At this point it's only solidly backed by the hypothetical returns on AGI.

I do not really want to debate the relative Chinese «soft power». They've made some progress; in the end, they're profoundly inferior in messaging to the US and even Japan and will continue to be inferior. I simply think it doesn't matter much, most of the goodwill America gets from other countries is based not on media exports or high-quality propaganda but on actual strategic interests and demonstrable benefits of cooperation. And American media as of now has become repetitive slop with questionable ideological payload, nobody gets inspired to defend Democracy Human Rights by Captain America, it's just (at best) neutral entertaining content, like Labubus or Funko Pops in the physical realm. Holding Funko Pop IP is not really a source of political loyalty, it's a source of Funko Pop revenue. If the ROI on continued cooperation nosedives, you still get reaction like Carney's. So my objection to TiltingGambit is just that: the US won't have «all the allies» specifically on merit of its «charismatic cultural export». It's a cute way of expressing pride in your nation's strengths but it's basically a joke, like a German saying foreigners would die for German beer and autos, or an Italian claiming there are Pasta Nationalists all over the world. (That said, he claims to not even be American, so I guess we can conclude this pride narrative also gets exported).

To have All The Allies, the US will need to continue being the version of itself that's profitable to be allied with – security guarantees, reasonable economic relations. In peacetime, this is realistic and not that expensive. For the profits to outweigh the costs of opposing Chinese industrial machine in the hypothetical WWIII, either the machine needs to be somewhat less impressive than it's shaping up to be, or America will have to be more generous than it's being under Trump. Charisma is overrated, mostly due to motivated reasoning about comparative advantages.

The way I see the Euro/Canadian threats to cozy up to China is that if they are still truly Western countries, they are probably bluffing. What European nation would willingly submit to Ottoman or Mongol hegemony just to spite the Pope? Overtures, sure, symbolic gestures and treaties maybe, but never submission.

See, ironically, this is a pretty non-Western worldview. The whole premise of the Rules-Based International Liberal Order was that you don't have to kowtow to the strong. This is the idea China espouses, too – they constantly drone on about the UN Charter and the equality of nations. It's easy to dismiss as insincere, but how exactly is it insincere? Sure, they can punish a country for crossing their «red line» with a tariff. But weaponization of tariffs is routine now. In contrast, Trump not only tariffs at will, sometimes very pettily, making up red lines on the go, but he demands precisely submission, ritual humiliations, he will even flex it by publicly leaking private conversations where he's asked not to do just this. (Or making up the whole thing to flex before his sadistic fans, which is pathetic in its own way. But he's doubling down.)

At this stage, your argument amounts to a purely racial one. Profitably working with China in a context that gives them leverage is automatically «submission» and so «unacceptable to Western countries». Working with the US is honorable alliance between Free White Peoples, reasonable submission to the primus inter pares, even as the hegemon explicitly frames it as a hierarchy where he's the lion and you're the small dog (thus getting raped). …I guess I don't know, I'm not a Western person, maybe this whole story of the Hajnal Line anti-racism was a lie, and y'all are invested in White Supremacy enough to accept such blatant gaslighting indefinitely. Maybe that's the Soft Power, the Charisma. But I'm getting the impression that this is not the case.

If the enlightenment "globohomo" religion has mutated and innovated to such a degree that it is no longer recognizably a strain of Christianity (the soil of western civilization) but some new thing that sees both the Western Christian nation state and the Chinese civilization state as equally alien and thus roughly equivalent

You've probably missed that I propose another thesis: Americans do not belong to the Western Civilization proper. They self-identify as «Judeo-Christians», they're heavily Latin American, they have unique rites and beliefs, strengths and weaknesses, they treat «the West» as adversarially and extractively as the East, and in fact Trump thinks much better of Xi than of any European leader. It's about as distant from Europe as Islam is. The «globohomo» didn't have to mutate all that far, and this year's WEF demonstrates that Americans have been making up bizarre headcanon bullshit about the «globohomo». It can judge this wholly new civilization as alien, but Christianity would concur.

Even a mild discount vs the very high US cost of production will enable functionally infinite sales.

US has been a small beef market for Argentina. 70% goes to China. I'm sure it's not because Argentinian beef is too expensive for Americans right now.

That's precisely the issue. America has GDP and tries to have more GDP. It doesn't have money. It is a country with a chronically negative current account balance, literally $40T in debt, it has less money than anyone. On top of that it consistently has horrible financial discipline and vulnerability to scams and corruption at home. It can't afford to invest into shitholes with dubious ROI, so it does not invest in them and instead robs allies blind, raises tariffs, extorts investment, tries to monetize everything (eg Golden Visa, Board of Peace). Why do you think there exists BRI, but all American attempts to Build Back Better World or whatever have withered on the vine? China has money. America is broke. The main way it can share prosperity around is to deficit-spend buying Argentinian goods. And unfortunately, it already has enough beef and soy.

Superior to certain death? For those homeless, I guess.

But hot places aren't doomed to have so much homelessness. It's mostly economic dysfunction.

My location flag would display 🇦🇷 (assuming no VPNs, which I often use) and I'd be accused of being a brown third worldist anyway.

I am fairly fine with the US going it alone. We can rebuild Argentina

How about you rebuild the US first?

I am in Argentina now. What I see imported from the US is mainly the style of squalor. The material, artistic and civic culture of the modern US is plainly disgusting. Gigantic soda bottles, barely humanoid blobs waddling around, homelessness, trash, funko pops, capeshit comics, old gas-guzzling cars. No sense of propriety and harmony. It's Latin America, after all, but that's also America, how low-functioning America works. More money won't fix it, and it's not like you have money anyway.

I am fairly sure you are Indian and not native.

«You are Indian» sure is a new one. I'm 100% sure you must be new here.

Maybe Europe and Canada should just not resist and be on the MAGA side

Is it the winning side though?

This is either concern trolling or depressing lack of confidence.
It's fine if you accept your own subjugation, but it's not a healthy human condition. Maybe your country shouldn't exist as a nation if it's non-viable on its own, and you should apply to become a state. Would be more dignified.

Canada likely is viable. Resisting Chinese influence is significantly easier than American one – no shared language, no blood ties, no border, for starters. As can be seen, even Russia, which is constantly mocked as «Chinese resource colony», in fact is anything but and conducts whatever loony policy it wants. Canadian goal, in any case, is not «become economically reliant on China instead of being economically reliant on the USA» but to increase the share of non-US trade, principally with China, import Chinese industrial technology, become more competitive in the world that's coming, and build military deterrence and alliances. The alternative is to let the US fully dismantle your economy, complete its demoralization campaign, and then absorb your territory.

If you cannot even conceive of a nation executing this and only offer false dichotomies between patrons, then I repeat, again, you don't have what it takes to have a nation.