[idiom]

Ghengis Kahn did it... You can't retreat to Siberia if Siberia is invading...

[CrudeAwakening]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Snowrunner', '
')Yes, but traditionally China hasn't "conquered" other places,

[MrBill]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('CrudeAwakening', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Snowrunner', '
')Yes, but traditionally China hasn't "conquered" other places,

[CarlosFerreira]

Mmmm... question: if there are wars in order to invade and maintain land in the future (the if regards the fact that war demands large amounts of capital and fuel, both of which I'm supposing won't be so available in the future as they are today), it makes sense the chinese invade Russia: they have more people, and wars will probably be strongly based on the sizes of armies, and because of the larger population, need places where they can send overpopulation as emigrants.

Without US assistance, if Taiwan goes, I am supposing South Korea may fall as well.

So, this happens on the other side of Russia. What about the western side. Do you suppose EU might go for it? There are interesting resources there.

[Cloud9]

Don't write off Japan as the Red Dragon rises.

[Kingcoal]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Snowrunner', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Snowrunner', 'A')s for "held together by Force". What do you make then of the current American Empire? The US has troops in more places these days than the USSR ever had at the height of their empire.

[MrBill]

No, I do not believe realistically that western Europe has any designs on Russian territory. Not in my lifetime. But events may change.

However, on that note, although the ownership of a particular Buddhist temple was settled by an international court in 1962 Thailand and Cambodia are almost at war as we speak over the 4.5 hectares surrounding the temple. Cambodia has asked for international arbitration.

There are also riots in the streets of Belgrade, but celebrations in the streets of Bosnia over the arrest of a wanted Serbian leader accused of genocide and crimes against humanity. So never say never. Once nationalistic passions get stirred up on real or imagined grounds then the results on the ground can turn ugly quickly.

The civil war here in Cyprus was the unfortunate outcome of the Cold War between the USSR and the USA that was fought by proxy between Ankara and Athens. The island is still divided even though those issues no longer matter. The wounds take a long time to heal.

[Snowrunner]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Kingcoal', 'W')hat you are describing is "soft persuasion." America's reign is an interesting one, based on the outcomes from WW2. The US, in possession of large, developed oil reserves coupled with the nuclear bomb, naturally dominated. Past empires were characterized by conquest, similar to what GWB did in Iraq. As you can see, we aren't very good at it. The British Empire, for example, didn't bother with trying to install democratic governments in countries they conquered. They installed their own people and the lines drawn were pretty clear; "we run things now, we are the elite." The Romans did the same. That's the way to run an empire. There are no illusions about where the power lies, what the rules are and who is in charge.

[Snowrunner]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('CrudeAwakening', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Snowrunner', 'Y')es, but traditionally China hasn't "conquered" other places,

[CarlosFerreira]

The Powder Keg of Europe. Might blow up on someone's face again.

Sis and I usually joke about that, everytime someone in Europe sneezes, Poland gets invaded. Last week, Angela Merkel appeared on screen and I swear I though she was going to say "Hell! We haven't invaded Poland in a long time, have we?"

Personally, I think the European countries will be left to argue among themselves. Perhaps agriculture here in Europe is more sustainable. I believe that, somewhere soon, food will be power.

[Snowrunner]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MrBill', 'O')nce there is a sizeable local Chinese population the Chinese would intervene politically and then militarily if necessary if they felt the local Chinese were under threat. Much like Russia uses the pretence of Russians living on its borders as an excuse to meddle in the politics of its neighbors or deploy troops along their borders. Give it another 30-50 years. Who is going to oppose them?

[bodigami]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Micki', '(')...)
Communism and Anarchism are systems that can only work once humanity is free from egoism and greed.

[BlueGhostNo2]

Something I find interesting is that in a 'free market' capitalist & democratic system there is nothing preventing a communist or highly socialist society spontaneously springing into existence.


All that is necessary is either a majority of people vote in politicians who create this communist society. (hell in most democracy it could even be a minority who vote in the right manner).


or even fairer, everyone who has money and earnings voluntarily decides to spend it in such a way as to create a society which provides for everyone...


The fact neither of these things happen suggest two things:
1) The vast majority of people don't want real socialism / communism.
2) The vast majority of people don't really care about other people in their society. (They may claim to care, they may care when they directly observe suffering or make a token gesture when confronted with the emotional reality but they don't make a habit of caring).


SO, given the above I don't see how anyone can claim that a communist / socialist society is going to work / even if it is government enforced/ because command economies NEED incorruptible officials who have power AND honest workers who will provide accurate information to the planners and not attempt to avoid the hard work required of them...

If you want to prove that a communist / socialist society can and should work, then create one, work your ass off whilst living frugally and donating to charities which support education of poor children (This is I suspect the most efficient way of helping poor people).

The fact that most proponents of socialism are not prepared to do this basically suggests that their real attraction to the idea is not their desire for a society which provides for all, but their desire to see those who have more than them flattened down to their level.

[MrBill]

You're right BlueGhost. People are keen on their rights and freedoms, but not so keen on obligations and responsibilities. Especially not when it curbs their own behavior or is seen to benefit someone else. Most voters support higher taxes on others be they 'high networth individuals' or 'rich corporations', but most resist the idea that they should pay more taxes or pay more than they get back in benefits. That is a pretty comfortable place from which to preach about the evils of the market economy. As you so accurately point out they have the power of the ballot box and their own freedom of choices with which to have what they want. If they really wanted it. Good post! Thanks.

[CarlosFerreira]

It does sound good, and the capitalist dog-eat-dog does sound bad. Somehow a socialist system feels more humane, more in touch with the human nature, dignity and respect for everyone. A society that leave no-one behind. That'd be something.

The thing is, global economy probably can't afford a western-like level of living. I try to live frugally, really, I do. But I'm not sure everyone would. As a matter of education, and since the local Green Party is associated with the local Communist Party, went to them to the Commies' to listen to their opinions on environment, sustainability, Peak Oil and economy. It was mostly what I'd call nonsense. Pretty much what is stated in Limits to Growth: Communism is an offshoot from Capitalism. They do believe, like capitalists, that nature and resources exist to be mined and used as fast as they can, although they add centrally controlled usage and distribution of resources. They'd Max-out our economy into oblivion, just like the capitalists do. They're just less efficient.

[Twilight]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('CarlosFerreira', 'T')he thing is, global economy probably can't afford a western-like level of living.

[Byron100]

One thing I'd like to point out is that most people don't support a socialist / communist society in places such as the US as we've managed to "socialize" a great deal of how we live as a society. If a Westerner so much lifts a finger (and most of the time even when they don't!), they get to enjoy a great deal of what most everyone else enjoys, like being able to to eat enough food to become overweight, living in an abode that has heating / AC / running water, access to a car or cheap public transportation, access to public education for one's children and access to basic medical care (even in the US, we have Medicare for the poor). Not to mention being able to buy clothes for a relative pittance, cheap TVs, computers, etc. You go to a poor person's house in America, you'll find that their No. 1 problem is not the lack of stuff...it's too much stuff...hehe. Believe me, I've seen it with my own eyes.

I think the big shift towards the left will occur when western societies experience a rapid, significant drop in the standard of living than they're accustomed to. It's when the masses can no longer drive a car or be able to have a full belly each night, or they're no longer able to pay the power bill, and a used pair of blue jeans costs as much as 2 day's of low-paid labor...*that's* when we're going to see a major political shift towards the left. As it stands now, we really have the best of both worlds, namely the abundance of a free-market system plus the security blanket of a socialist-style political system. But take that away, and when the former middle class are in the gutter while the rich still get to carry on pretty much as they've always had...that's when it's time for the rich to be afraid. Very afraid.

[CarlosFerreira]

We can only hope that, if that happens, the Left that takes over has a strong idea for the environmental resources and problems, or else it's more of the same poison. Problem with left ideologies might be the same thing that's their most positive calling to the masses: the promise to provide everyone according to their needs. Doing that might prove extremely destructive if said needs are not moderate, if they just decide to destroy a bit more instead of providing a bit less, but enough.

I've seen that left, and it ain't the answer.