Culture Why America Must Maintain Ideological Dominance by Bradley A. Thayer

Bassoe

Well-known member
source
China is the single most formidable peer competitive threat faced by the United States. It alone has the potential to replace the United States as the world’s hegemon, an ambition the Soviets may have possessed but never could have achieved due to their weaknesses, particularly economically. We can foresee a future where China has the ability to force Washington to yield and cede its regional and global interests in favor of Beijing’s. China’s greater willingness to use coercion to advance its interests provides a window into that future, as its territorial expansion and militarization of the South China Sea illuminate. Whether the United States can remain the preeminent force for free and open societies in the face of a rising China is the defining element of international politics in the twenty-first century, and the most immediate U.S. national security policy interest.

An understanding of the future of the Sino-American confrontation entails an understanding of why both China and the United States are motivated for conflict. Despite the importance of the issue, the nature and scope of the threat are still not fully grasped in America. However, there are three ways to understand Sino-American confrontation. First, there are the causes: the change in the balance of power in China’s favor and the conflicting ideologies of the two states. Second, the United States leadership and the American people must understand “Why China Fights.” That is, what the Chinese leadership want, and why they are willing to fight America. Third, Americans must grasp “Why the U.S. Fights,” to maintain freedom and other liberal values and to preserve its dominant position, while comprehending the fundamental advantages Washington possesses. Illuminating the two conceptions of victory demonstrates the ultimate and irreconcilable gap in the visions for international politics between Washington and Beijing, and consequently why conflict—certainly cold, and very possibly hot—is inevitable.

The Causes of the Sino-American Conflict: Shifting Balance of Power and Ideology

From both the Chinese and American perspectives, two fundamental factors explain the source of the conflict. First, the Sino-American struggle is material—economic and military power matter, particularly the shifting balance of relative power from the United States to China. This shift feeds ambition in China and fear in Washington. Given its strongly nationalistic and ethnocentric beliefs, China as a rising hegemon would challenge any dominant state—as it did the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. It is of historical importance that this is the first time in its long history that China is a rising hegemon. In its past, it was the dominant state in Asia—the primary world it knew. Even after its defeat in the First Opium War, China maintained the pretension that it was still dominant until colonization by Europeans, Japanese, and Americans forced the abandonment of its pretensions. Now, for the first time in its history, China is the challenger to the dominant state. This is something new in the history of empires because the example of China shows you can be on top, lose it all, and return to greatness or even dominance. In historical context, this is a remarkably impressive feat—unmatched by any empire in history.

Second, the cause of the struggle is also inherently ideological. Ideology illuminates what will be gained for the victor—the return of the Middle Kingdom or the triumph of freedom—and what will be lost for the defeated. It inspires the leadership and population of both sides. It also provides an understanding of the intensity of passion on the Chinese side—the hatred for America for hindering China’s return to its rightful position and for Washington’s arrogance. Beijing and Chinese citizens are also upset with Americans for not realizing its time is past, and so it must yield gracefully to the new hegemon. Yet so far, a concomitant level of strategic focus and passion is absent on the U.S. side. That needs to change.

“Why China Fights:” The Return of the Middle Kingdom

The Chinese seek confrontation in order to achieve their conception of victory—the return of the Middle Kingdom’s suzerainty and the replacement of Washington by Beijing as the dominant power in international politics. This ambition is a natural one for the Chinese leadership and population, and is caused by their conception of China’s place in the world. For the Chinese, or more particularly, the majority Han population, there is the supremacist belief that the Han are the greatest people, the creators of the most sophisticated polity, and to whom other peoples and states should be deferential.

For Han-supremacists, it is right and proper that China dominates international politics because China was the most advanced, culturally refined, and humane civilization in history. Han-supremacy is anchored in millennia and is a core component of Chinese political culture. Consequently, it is a far deeper force than Communism or capitalism. Han culture is viewed as the epitome of civilized life and contains traditional values of industriousness, discipline, patriotism, love of the Han and their history.

In essence, the Chinese seek a Warren Hardingesque “return to normalcy,” where they resume their position as the epitome of civilization and the world’s fountainhead of economic and political power. For its adherents, the United States is a malevolent force which seeks to prevent the natural and right order of international politics—Chinese hegemony—from returning. This perspective is not likely to change.

Beijing will fight the United States because it is the single major impediment to China’s strategic objectives. With America removed, there is no single power, or constellation of powers such as Australia, Japan, and India, that could prevent Beijing from achieving its aims, which Xi Jinping transparently and boldly advances in his conception of a hegemonic China by 2049. The United States is the barrier to the realization of China’s ambitions and is its ideological opponent, and so it is the focus of China’s enmity.

“Why the U.S. Fights:” Preservation of Freedom

U.S. leadership seeks to maintain its position because that is best, first, for U.S. security; second, the security of its allies; and third, for the promotion of its ideology. America’s ideological push is vital to ensure that freedom and democratic government, open societies, and free markets are the dominant values of international politics. In sum, Washington fights for the international order it created after World War II, and which it expanded after the Cold War.

America seeks to maintain the status quo, its position and the order it has known, and that both Washington and the American people expect to continue. That expectation was conceived and conditioned in the calm geopolitical seas of the 1990s and 2000s. That time is past. As China has risen, Washington must now battle to maintain its place in the world and the dominance of its military, economy, ideology, and technological leadership. Indeed, America is forced to fight to defend its position, allies, and values. But this cannot be wholly a defensive war, the United States must actively confront China in each realm, and put China on the back foot in order to ensure the United States and its allies triumph in each aspect of the competition.

While the military and economic components are essential, ideology is their equal. Ideology is critical for Washington as it motivates the U.S. response to China with a comprehension, energy, and vigor that material forces cannot. As the U.S. Navy historically contends: “ships don’t fight, men do.” People fight to defend their country and ideology. Accordingly, the value of the ideology of the United States is the spine that supports U.S. power. U.S. ideology unifies and inspires the American people, as well as ideological sympathizers around the world, and explains why China’s ideology and vision for the world should be resisted.

In explaining “Why We Fight,” the United States must contrast its dynamic, innovative, free, and open society, with the wealthy and increasingly prosperous, but ethnocentric, racist, and closed society of the Chinese. The West went through a Civil Rights Movement to create cultures of anti-racism throughout their societies. In China, the idea of a Civil Rights Movement that would aid the condition of women and minorities, and so undermine Han-supremacy, is unthinkable. That stark recognition captures the profound differences between the two societies. Equally importantly, U.S. ideology may serve to undermine the legitimacy of the authoritarian rule of the Communist Party of China in the minds of the Chinese people.

Ideology also provides Washington with key advantages. As a free and open society, the United States is a better ally for states in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, than China, whose alliances are frequently characterized by abuse of its erstwhile ally’s people and resources. In contrast to China, U.S. decision-making is transparent to allies, it is a dynamic and inclusive society, and has a long history of protecting the interests of its allies, and treating them as equal partners. America’s free and open political principles make the United States a more valuable and dependable ally.

Moreover, as U.S. power declines relative to China’s, Washington is likely to depend more on ideology than economic and military power. Consequently, the United States will have to depend more on its allies and other cooperative states, in Europe, Asia, and Africa. This situation plays to the United States’ ideological strength and is a great advantage for Washington. China seeks resources globally, offering infrastructure development and foreign direct investment to the many states willing to partner, if not yet align, with it. Thus far, the United States has chosen not to match China’s ability in these categories, but it does—hands down—far exceed China’s ability to inspire the people of the world.

Furthermore, while the interests of its allies are varied, U.S. ideology serves as the cement for alignment against China, particularly for states in Africa, Asia. This is true even in Europe, where economic interest might cause an alliance with China or neutrality in the face of an intensifying Sino-American conflict. The United States cannot fight this struggle alone and the good news is that it need not. The ideology of the United States allows it to maintain relations with Asia-Pacific and European states based on common interests and political principles. But the struggle does require U.S. leadership.

China’s conception of victory is deeply disturbing, disagreeable, and dangerous for stability: the Middle Kingdom returned to dominance, with all other states in a subordinate position. “Why China Fights” is for Han-supremacy. “Why the U.S. Fights” is to preserve a future free and open, and to prevent the hegemony of a great power governed by a nation-based supremacist ideology. The Sino-American conflict will determine whether the security and position of Washington are maintained, and freedom and open societies remain the dominant ideal in international politics. Or whether America will lose, and freedom is supplanted by authoritarianism and Han-supremacism.
Mr. Thayer does realize american soldiers aren't disposable mindless automatons to be expended in an ideological crusade for a system which has gleefully spent the past few decades screwing them over, they expect some form of benefit in exchange for risking their lives? Right?
 

The Whispering Monk

Well-known member
Osaul
Mr. Thayer does realize american soldiers aren't disposable mindless automatons to be expended in an ideological crusade for a system which has gleefully spent the past few decades screwing them over, they expect some form of benefit in exchange for risking their lives? Right?

From my reading of this article, it looks like the author is assuming that America's power (militarily & economically) will wane vs China's and that America will need to leverage its ideological power (freedom vs Chinese hegemony) in order to build alliances to counterbalance and overcome China's will.

The author does acknowledge the importance of the Military and Economic struggle. He's on a purely macro level in his analysis and never addresses the individual soldier at all. Though his emphasis on ideology may very well provide what he thinks will be sufficient means of recruitment for the US. [That's purely my assumption from reading however.]
 

ATP

Well-known member
source
China is the single most formidable peer competitive threat faced by the United States. It alone has the potential to replace the United States as the world’s hegemon, an ambition the Soviets may have possessed but never could have achieved due to their weaknesses, particularly economically. We can foresee a future where China has the ability to force Washington to yield and cede its regional and global interests in favor of Beijing’s. China’s greater willingness to use coercion to advance its interests provides a window into that future, as its territorial expansion and militarization of the South China Sea illuminate. Whether the United States can remain the preeminent force for free and open societies in the face of a rising China is the defining element of international politics in the twenty-first century, and the most immediate U.S. national security policy interest.

An understanding of the future of the Sino-American confrontation entails an understanding of why both China and the United States are motivated for conflict. Despite the importance of the issue, the nature and scope of the threat are still not fully grasped in America. However, there are three ways to understand Sino-American confrontation. First, there are the causes: the change in the balance of power in China’s favor and the conflicting ideologies of the two states. Second, the United States leadership and the American people must understand “Why China Fights.” That is, what the Chinese leadership want, and why they are willing to fight America. Third, Americans must grasp “Why the U.S. Fights,” to maintain freedom and other liberal values and to preserve its dominant position, while comprehending the fundamental advantages Washington possesses. Illuminating the two conceptions of victory demonstrates the ultimate and irreconcilable gap in the visions for international politics between Washington and Beijing, and consequently why conflict—certainly cold, and very possibly hot—is inevitable.

The Causes of the Sino-American Conflict: Shifting Balance of Power and Ideology

From both the Chinese and American perspectives, two fundamental factors explain the source of the conflict. First, the Sino-American struggle is material—economic and military power matter, particularly the shifting balance of relative power from the United States to China. This shift feeds ambition in China and fear in Washington. Given its strongly nationalistic and ethnocentric beliefs, China as a rising hegemon would challenge any dominant state—as it did the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. It is of historical importance that this is the first time in its long history that China is a rising hegemon. In its past, it was the dominant state in Asia—the primary world it knew. Even after its defeat in the First Opium War, China maintained the pretension that it was still dominant until colonization by Europeans, Japanese, and Americans forced the abandonment of its pretensions. Now, for the first time in its history, China is the challenger to the dominant state. This is something new in the history of empires because the example of China shows you can be on top, lose it all, and return to greatness or even dominance. In historical context, this is a remarkably impressive feat—unmatched by any empire in history.

Second, the cause of the struggle is also inherently ideological. Ideology illuminates what will be gained for the victor—the return of the Middle Kingdom or the triumph of freedom—and what will be lost for the defeated. It inspires the leadership and population of both sides. It also provides an understanding of the intensity of passion on the Chinese side—the hatred for America for hindering China’s return to its rightful position and for Washington’s arrogance. Beijing and Chinese citizens are also upset with Americans for not realizing its time is past, and so it must yield gracefully to the new hegemon. Yet so far, a concomitant level of strategic focus and passion is absent on the U.S. side. That needs to change.

“Why China Fights:” The Return of the Middle Kingdom

The Chinese seek confrontation in order to achieve their conception of victory—the return of the Middle Kingdom’s suzerainty and the replacement of Washington by Beijing as the dominant power in international politics. This ambition is a natural one for the Chinese leadership and population, and is caused by their conception of China’s place in the world. For the Chinese, or more particularly, the majority Han population, there is the supremacist belief that the Han are the greatest people, the creators of the most sophisticated polity, and to whom other peoples and states should be deferential.

For Han-supremacists, it is right and proper that China dominates international politics because China was the most advanced, culturally refined, and humane civilization in history. Han-supremacy is anchored in millennia and is a core component of Chinese political culture. Consequently, it is a far deeper force than Communism or capitalism. Han culture is viewed as the epitome of civilized life and contains traditional values of industriousness, discipline, patriotism, love of the Han and their history.

In essence, the Chinese seek a Warren Hardingesque “return to normalcy,” where they resume their position as the epitome of civilization and the world’s fountainhead of economic and political power. For its adherents, the United States is a malevolent force which seeks to prevent the natural and right order of international politics—Chinese hegemony—from returning. This perspective is not likely to change.

Beijing will fight the United States because it is the single major impediment to China’s strategic objectives. With America removed, there is no single power, or constellation of powers such as Australia, Japan, and India, that could prevent Beijing from achieving its aims, which Xi Jinping transparently and boldly advances in his conception of a hegemonic China by 2049. The United States is the barrier to the realization of China’s ambitions and is its ideological opponent, and so it is the focus of China’s enmity.

“Why the U.S. Fights:” Preservation of Freedom

U.S. leadership seeks to maintain its position because that is best, first, for U.S. security; second, the security of its allies; and third, for the promotion of its ideology. America’s ideological push is vital to ensure that freedom and democratic government, open societies, and free markets are the dominant values of international politics. In sum, Washington fights for the international order it created after World War II, and which it expanded after the Cold War.

America seeks to maintain the status quo, its position and the order it has known, and that both Washington and the American people expect to continue. That expectation was conceived and conditioned in the calm geopolitical seas of the 1990s and 2000s. That time is past. As China has risen, Washington must now battle to maintain its place in the world and the dominance of its military, economy, ideology, and technological leadership. Indeed, America is forced to fight to defend its position, allies, and values. But this cannot be wholly a defensive war, the United States must actively confront China in each realm, and put China on the back foot in order to ensure the United States and its allies triumph in each aspect of the competition.

While the military and economic components are essential, ideology is their equal. Ideology is critical for Washington as it motivates the U.S. response to China with a comprehension, energy, and vigor that material forces cannot. As the U.S. Navy historically contends: “ships don’t fight, men do.” People fight to defend their country and ideology. Accordingly, the value of the ideology of the United States is the spine that supports U.S. power. U.S. ideology unifies and inspires the American people, as well as ideological sympathizers around the world, and explains why China’s ideology and vision for the world should be resisted.

In explaining “Why We Fight,” the United States must contrast its dynamic, innovative, free, and open society, with the wealthy and increasingly prosperous, but ethnocentric, racist, and closed society of the Chinese. The West went through a Civil Rights Movement to create cultures of anti-racism throughout their societies. In China, the idea of a Civil Rights Movement that would aid the condition of women and minorities, and so undermine Han-supremacy, is unthinkable. That stark recognition captures the profound differences between the two societies. Equally importantly, U.S. ideology may serve to undermine the legitimacy of the authoritarian rule of the Communist Party of China in the minds of the Chinese people.

Ideology also provides Washington with key advantages. As a free and open society, the United States is a better ally for states in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, than China, whose alliances are frequently characterized by abuse of its erstwhile ally’s people and resources. In contrast to China, U.S. decision-making is transparent to allies, it is a dynamic and inclusive society, and has a long history of protecting the interests of its allies, and treating them as equal partners. America’s free and open political principles make the United States a more valuable and dependable ally.

Moreover, as U.S. power declines relative to China’s, Washington is likely to depend more on ideology than economic and military power. Consequently, the United States will have to depend more on its allies and other cooperative states, in Europe, Asia, and Africa. This situation plays to the United States’ ideological strength and is a great advantage for Washington. China seeks resources globally, offering infrastructure development and foreign direct investment to the many states willing to partner, if not yet align, with it. Thus far, the United States has chosen not to match China’s ability in these categories, but it does—hands down—far exceed China’s ability to inspire the people of the world.

Furthermore, while the interests of its allies are varied, U.S. ideology serves as the cement for alignment against China, particularly for states in Africa, Asia. This is true even in Europe, where economic interest might cause an alliance with China or neutrality in the face of an intensifying Sino-American conflict. The United States cannot fight this struggle alone and the good news is that it need not. The ideology of the United States allows it to maintain relations with Asia-Pacific and European states based on common interests and political principles. But the struggle does require U.S. leadership.

China’s conception of victory is deeply disturbing, disagreeable, and dangerous for stability: the Middle Kingdom returned to dominance, with all other states in a subordinate position. “Why China Fights” is for Han-supremacy. “Why the U.S. Fights” is to preserve a future free and open, and to prevent the hegemony of a great power governed by a nation-based supremacist ideology. The Sino-American conflict will determine whether the security and position of Washington are maintained, and freedom and open societies remain the dominant ideal in international politics. Or whether America will lose, and freedom is supplanted by authoritarianism and Han-supremacism.
Mr. Thayer does realize american soldiers aren't disposable mindless automatons to be expended in an ideological crusade for a system which has gleefully spent the past few decades screwing them over, they expect some form of benefit in exchange for risking their lives? Right?



Indeed.Why american soldiers,or any others,should fight for current system? it has nothing to do with freedom,and defending leftist state from commies is unlogical.Both sides would do the same.So,why fight for one of them?
 

ParadiseLost

Well-known member
I'm sorry, isn't what he's saying pretty much entirely in line with what the average Sietcher believes?

The biggest difference is that most Sietcher's are way too optimistic about China collapsing on its own, unlike Thayer here.
 

ShieldWife

Marchioness
I'm sorry, isn't what he's saying pretty much entirely in line with what the average Sietcher believes?

The biggest difference is that most Sietcher's are way too optimistic about China collapsing on its own, unlike Thayer here.
I don’t know about the average Sietcher, if there is such a thing, but what he’s saying certainly isn’t in line with what I think.

The American dominance in the world now serves the interests of a bunch of globalist elites who hate normal Americans and uses them to get power, dominance, and wealth. The nonsense about protecting democracy around the world and making people free is just that - nonsense - and has been so for over century.

Also, China will become the dominant world power of the 21st century, nothing we can do will stop that. The only hope America has is preventing our own nation from completely collapsing, which is almost certain to happen.
 

The Whispering Monk

Well-known member
Osaul
Also, China will become the dominant world power of the 21st century, nothing we can do will stop that. The only hope America has is preventing our own nation from completely collapsing, which is almost certain to happen.
That's not a foregone conclusion. There is SO much that can and will happen to alter things as we move along. Things we have no idea are coming.
 

ShieldWife

Marchioness
That's not a foregone conclusion. There is SO much that can and will happen to alter things as we move along. Things we have no idea are coming.
It’s pretty close to a forgone conclusion. Obviously, unforeseen things can happen that throw off even the most well informed predictions, but we have to admit it’s highly unlikely. We don’t plan our finances based on winning the lottery.

Saying that China is going to collapse soon is mostly just copium from people who are emotionally invested in America being #1. The right is going to have to look inward to strive to preserve good things about America instead of being prideful about being better than others if we are going to save anything valuable about our culture.
 
Last edited:

The Whispering Monk

Well-known member
Osaul
Saying that China is going to collapse soon is mostly just copium from people who are emotionally invested in America being #1. The right is going to have to look inward to strive to preserve good things about America instead of being prideful about being better than others if we are going to safe anything valuable about our culture.
China's going to collapse, I don't think that's really debatable at this point. The form and timing of that collapse is what's up for debate.

China has too many systemic failures/weaknesses for it to continue as is, and that's not cope. It's recognition of reality.

Reality also says that the US is quickly headed in the same direction with minimal chances of correction.

Neither one of those things is mutually exclusive. In fact, our global economy may mean individual collapse results in mutual collapse. We'll see.
 

Cherico

Well-known member
China's going to collapse, I don't think that's really debatable at this point. The form and timing of that collapse is what's up for debate.

China has too many systemic failures/weaknesses for it to continue as is, and that's not cope. It's recognition of reality.

Reality also says that the US is quickly headed in the same direction with minimal chances of correction.

Neither one of those things is mutually exclusive. In fact, our global economy may mean individual collapse results in mutual collapse. We'll see.

China as a country will come back, the chinise comunist parties days are numbered but its people an actual culture is a resiliant thing. China has lived most of its long history with out the CCP and has done quite well for themselves.

Like wise the US is probally heading into a civil war and that will be painful but countries have gone through those before and come out stronger.

Things will suck but they wont suck forever.
 

The Whispering Monk

Well-known member
Osaul
China as a country will come back, the chinise comunist parties days are numbered but its people an actual culture is a resiliant thing. China has lived most of its long history with out the CCP and has done quite well for themselves.
At no point was I addressing the Chinese people. Their failed state is currently digging its own grave and pouring its own people into it. Pretty standard actions for a communist/totalitarian regime.

Things will suck but they wont suck forever.
Only want to make it better for my kids...or, failing that, provide them a path to make it better for theirs.
 

ShieldWife

Marchioness
At numerous times over the past 2000 years, China has been the most advanced and powerful nation in the world. That hasn’t been the case for a while, but it will be again within a few decades. Like Cherico says, this goes beyond communism. In fact, in many important ways, China abandoned communism years ago. I don’t see how it’s a failed state in any way, we’re close to failing than they are.

The USA’s decline is largely unrelated to that, though we are at the stage where we need to be worrying more about our own numerous problem and not maintaining some kind of global hegemony. Most international activities are just going to bankrupt us sooner.
 

The Whispering Monk

Well-known member
Osaul
At numerous times over the past 2000 years, China has been the most advanced and powerful nation in the world. That hasn’t been the case for a while, but it will be again within a few decades. Like Cherico says, this goes beyond communism. In fact, in many important ways, China abandoned communism years ago. I don’t see how it’s a failed state in any way, we’re close to failing than they are.
Chinese infrastructure is in shambles compared to the US, despite most of our infrastructure being older. The US Infrastructure definitely needs work.

The Chinese are unable to sustain their own population's need for food or clean water at this point. Not a problem for the US.

The Chinese economy is currently imploding thanks to the real-estate nonsense. The US is economy is not great, but we are not that far down the drain yet.

The Chinese government is currently working to gain a dictator for life AND they are moving all levers to make sure there is no opposition to Xi. That kind of pressure, on top of everything else, is rife with disaster.

It's these very reasons why China is actively a huge threat to the US, fiscally and physically. I have no doubt that China (Xi) is going to be looking for an easy way to unite the factions/people behind him. Nothing like an external enemy/goal to do that.
 

Aldarion

Neoreactionary Monarchist
China's going to collapse, I don't think that's really debatable at this point. The form and timing of that collapse is what's up for debate.

China has too many systemic failures/weaknesses for it to continue as is, and that's not cope. It's recognition of reality.

Reality also says that the US is quickly headed in the same direction with minimal chances of correction.

Neither one of those things is mutually exclusive. In fact, our global economy may mean individual collapse results in mutual collapse. We'll see.

So will United States and the West in general. Every system collapses eventually upon reaching the level of complexity that is too expensive to maintain, and as we have seen so far, general Western response to any problem was to increase the levels of complexity (e.g. supranational organizations etc.).

The only question is which will collapse first. And when collapse does happen, China will find it much easier to recover. Whole woke nonsense did much more damage to the West than most people seem to realize, I think. In the end, every system constains the seeds of its own collapse, but it is difficult to find a system as actively self-destructive as modern Progressive West - and progressivism came out of the US and Germany.
 

ATP

Well-known member
So will United States and the West in general. Every system collapses eventually upon reaching the level of complexity that is too expensive to maintain, and as we have seen so far, general Western response to any problem was to increase the levels of complexity (e.g. supranational organizations etc.).

The only question is which will collapse first. And when collapse does happen, China will find it much easier to recover. Whole woke nonsense did much more damage to the West than most people seem to realize, I think. In the end, every system constains the seeds of its own collapse, but it is difficult to find a system as actively self-destructive as modern Progressive West - and progressivism came out of the US and Germany.

Indeed.Both USA and China would collapse in some form - but,as you say,woke USA could not survive that.
 

DarthOne

☦️
So will United States and the West in general. Every system collapses eventually upon reaching the level of complexity that is too expensive to maintain, and as we have seen so far, general Western response to any problem was to increase the levels of complexity (e.g. supranational organizations etc.).

The only question is which will collapse first. And when collapse does happen, China will find it much easier to recover. Whole woke nonsense did much more damage to the West than most people seem to realize, I think. In the end, every system constains the seeds of its own collapse, but it is difficult to find a system as actively self-destructive as modern Progressive West - and progressivism came out of the US and Germany.
One can only hope that we can mitigate the damage. Or at the very least able to make sure that this time around, the woke progressive ideals are thoroughly stomped into the dust, alongside those the Nazis Germany and the Confederate States of America.

I’d throw in the USSR too, but those ideas aren’t dead yet, as can be seen by the various communist groups still running around and trying to take over in the West.
 

Aldarion

Neoreactionary Monarchist
One can only hope that we can mitigate the damage. Or at the very least able to make sure that this time around, the woke progressive ideals are thoroughly stomped into the dust, alongside those the Nazis Germany and the Confederate States of America.

I’d throw in the USSR too, but those ideas aren’t dead yet, as can be seen by the various communist groups still running around and trying to take over in the West.

Woke progressivism is Communism, so as far as I'm concerned, Communism already has taken over the West. Those "various communist groups still running around" are basically a clown show to distract from this fact...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top