Uncomfortable parallels with the era that led to the first world war • Hacker News Board

Re: Uncomfortable parallels with the era that led to the first world war

#91

Post by austinz » Mon, Dec 30, 2013, 6:07 AM UTC

jusben1369 wrote: post #75

austinz wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These same tired arguments were being made back in 2005, and given the utter lack of any sort of critical analysis backing them I predict they'll be just as wrong now as they were back then.

I wasn't making the argument in 2005 so that comment isn't very helpful. I'll assume you're just focused on the Chinese piece in your acerbic reply. http://qz.com/160091/china-puts-out-yet-another-credit-marke... "China’s highly-leveraged and opaque financial system ranks high on the list of threats to global growth" Or this that shows the recent problems: http://qz.com/72487/shadow-banking-brought-america-to-its-kn.…

In 2005 the bogeyman was local government borrowing. In the late 1990s it was bad loans to SOEs that were going to collapse the Chinese banking system. You need to realize that the articles you are citing aren't based upon any sort of substantive analysis. They're based on pundits and consultancy reports basically taking the same arguments they've used in the past (scale, opacity, interlocking interests) and fitting them with new buzzwords, without taking into account why they were wrong in the past or how conditions now are different from before.

Re: Uncomfortable parallels with the era that led to the first world war

#92

Post by yk » Mon, Dec 30, 2013, 6:29 AM UTC

VLM wrote: post #7

Not a very good analysis of the causes of WWI or application to today: Problems: 1) Cultural attitude of "eh, war is not so bad and higher tech means we'll be home by xmas". See franco-prussian war and the most recent "world war" being Napoleon's activities in the decade after the revolution a century ago. I'm not seeing much warmongering as a cultural phenomena. Of course that can change quickly, 90% of everything A…

More abstractly speaking, WWI was the breakdown of a alliance system that guaranteed peace in an earlier era. On this level, there is certainly a lot more going on since the end of the cold war, than between the crowning of Friedrich-Wilhelm and the outbreak of WWI.

About your specific points:

    1) Cultural attitude of "eh, war is not so bad and
     higher tech means we'll be home by xmas".

Ever visited r/worldnews ? Additionally the fetichization of the military in the US is for European eyes frankly absurd. Starting with "thank you for your service", the dedication of NFL games to the military and not ending with the picture of the military in movies.

    2) Germany surrounded [...] paranoid lash out.

Except the Sea-Air-Battle doctrine of the Dod is carefully designed for conflicts without a staging area. ( And they are actually not that shy about the target of this plan.) [1][2] China is rightfully paranoid, the largest military in history is currently pointed at them.

I will skip the 3rd point. ( I am not sure why the Ottoman empire should be the root cause, so its hard to comment on a analogy.)

    4) The article skipped several points WRT the German/British alliance thing, [...]

Great point, but if a US foreign policy like [3] takes hold, basically the idea that the US should preemptively prepare for a China-Russia alliance, then the US will create a China Russia alliance. Much in the same way Friedrich-Willhelm did create the Russian-French-British alliance.

Skipping 5,6,7, since I do not really view these as essential; I think that there are a lot of similarities between the eve of WWI and the current situation. This does not mean, that we are in exactly the same geostrategic situation but that there are enough similarities to start worrying. Or to quote Mark Twain: "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme."

[1] http://complex.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/08/20/surrounded...

[2] http://warm-oolong-tea.blogspot.de/2013/10/the-truths-and-my...

[3] http://www.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2013/12/02/2013-the...

Re: Uncomfortable parallels with the era that led to the first world war

#93

Post by berntb » Mon, Dec 30, 2013, 6:36 AM UTC

Tloewald wrote: post #74

berntb wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The subject was war. You started talking about your USA hatred. I asked for examples after the cold war (stupid of me to feed the trolls). You don't have anything relevant here either, so you list cases that are 40+ years old... This is a common pattern -- you can excuse anything (including burning food on the stove) with that a bad dictator had common interests with USA 50+ years ago... It is seriously funny when le…

I see you've inferred I am a "left winger" full of "USA hatred" and a "troll". You've also skillfully defeated arguments I have not made (e.g. blaming millions of deaths or lack of democracy in communist countries on the US). And having done this you've declared "enough". Well played. Incidentally, I love the US and happen to live here. I simply wish the US would stop making really foolish decisions that waste blood…

You troll, then insinuate I troll. Classic trick to blame others for what you do yourself -- someone browsing will just see two people calling each others names.

You wrote this weird garbage:

>>Communism isn't worse than anything no matter how bad.

That is typical left wing dishonesty, motivated with some Western country (usually USA) being dependent on and cooperating with an unpleasant dictator that is opressive and/or did mass murders.

If you have some other way of explaining that (drugs?), please do.

>>You've also skillfully defeated arguments I have not made (e.g. blaming millions of deaths or lack of democracy in communist countries on the US).

See previous paragraphs. You also wrote this:

>> It's hard to determine how bad some of the less nasty communist regimes such as Cuba and Vietnam would have been without massive economic sanctions from the US.

I can only read that as: "These enslaving juntas would have implemented human rights if it weren't for USA". Stupid.

Also see the debate history:

You changed the subject from war to realpoilitik complaints (which all countries do and lie about). It was stupid of me to comment on that and asking for examples post Cold War (which you didn't acknowledge you lack). Then you got weird (see above).

But ok, you might just lack a clue and not be a troll.

Re: Uncomfortable parallels with the era that led to the first world war

#94

Post by atoningunifex » Mon, Dec 30, 2013, 6:38 AM UTC

fatca wrote: post #54

There is one major difference: Since the Snowden affair, the United States no longer have allies.

Much as I wish that were true, its very not the case. Money talks.

Re: Uncomfortable parallels with the era that led to the first world war

#95

Post by VladRussian2 » Mon, Dec 30, 2013, 6:49 AM UTC

7952 wrote: post #56

myrandomcomment wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Chinese in general still feel humiliated by their treatment at the hands of the western powers and then their occupation by Japan in WW2. Furthermore they have an issue of not having enough resouces to feed their growth. Who ever owns the islands (more then one set - China is arguing with Japan, Korea, Vietnam and Philippines) has the rights to exploit the oil/gas fields in the ocean beds around them. Now to the…

The industrial base of the US is geared to manufacturing cold war weapons. Chinese industry is geared towards consumer electronics. Which could produce 1 million drones faster? Remember that a smart phone contains many of the key components for a drone.

>Remember that a smart phone contains many of the key components for a drone.

how about stealth supersonic self-landing on aircraft carrier satellite networked drones? Not that i doubt Chinese military or economical might, especially those of tomorrow, it is just they still have some distance to go.

Re: Uncomfortable parallels with the era that led to the first world war

#96

Post by DominikR » Mon, Dec 30, 2013, 7:04 AM UTC

jusben1369 wrote: post #55

It's an interesting time to be writing articles like this. Afghanistan, Iraq then the 2008 financial crisis. America lost prestige and the economy shrank considerably. These factors, real and perceived, coincided with the ongoing rise of China who for the most part avoided a real let down. I suspect that when we look back in 5 years from now we will really see 2013 as the last year of this low point. The US economy i…

Chinas economic collapse being imminent has now been predicted for decades.

I guess that those predictions are based more on wishful thinking than anything else.

Re: Uncomfortable parallels with the era that led to the first world war

#97

Post by 1457389 » Mon, Dec 30, 2013, 7:12 AM UTC

atoningunifex wrote: post #87

1457389 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't have a real answer yet, searching desperately though. Have to admit that I prefer what is going on now to the aristocratic and theocratic systems we had before in much of the world. The worst tyrants are the ideologues, and it seems that now the crooks have taken over instead. Anyway, nothing is going to change unless popular anger becomes a force to be reckoned with. The NSA is or will be a major obstacle to…

I can't see an answer either, that doesn't include some form of 'global awareness' (Julian May's Unity perhaps). That is what is depressing to me; the hegemony is complete, and the means left at our disposal to stop it, are gone.

Yeah, looks like the only real way involves being co-opted in turn. Seems like that's what ended up happening to Obama.

Re: Uncomfortable parallels with the era that led to the first world war

#98

Post by atoningunifex » Mon, Dec 30, 2013, 8:17 AM UTC

1457389 wrote: post #97

atoningunifex wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't see an answer either, that doesn't include some form of 'global awareness' (Julian May's Unity perhaps). That is what is depressing to me; the hegemony is complete, and the means left at our disposal to stop it, are gone.

Yeah, looks like the only real way involves being co-opted in turn. Seems like that's what ended up happening to Obama.

It does, but its a shit outcome. I was hoping you'd come out with a spring of hope for me :) I honestly see no good way out of this mess. Call me pessimistic, defeatist or whatever, but this is a system well sewn up. Getting out of it is impossible, I think, beyond an uprising.

Re: Uncomfortable parallels with the era that led to the first world war

#99

Post by randomafrican » Mon, Dec 30, 2013, 8:32 AM UTC

VLM wrote: post #13

npt4279 wrote: post #9

Thankfully, I don't see WWIII starting anytime soon... But I've always strongly thought the "globalisation will make war unthinkable" argument is naive. We're tribal creatures -Nationalism trumps economic interest at the end of the day. History shows this to be true. As the author hinted at - Russia, Germany, Britain, Belgium, and France were each other's biggest trading partners - by far! Heck, a Belgium company bui…

Another interesting point about globalization is the meaning of WWI style globalization was colonialism, every European power had overseas colonies (other than Germany). Another example where world trade didn't seem to help much.

On the other hand, while there was a lot of trade between European powers, part of the point of colonization was to have the colonies "trade" manly with the colonizer.

Re: Uncomfortable parallels with the era that led to the first world war

#100

Post by forgottenpaswrd » Mon, Dec 30, 2013, 8:51 AM UTC

The article is full of oversimplifications like WWI was "because of Germany". Oh , yeah. Why thinking when you can blame someone else?.

An article about WWs in the Economist should talk about economic data, about banks burning and destroying the savings of decades of the work of the people. They need to talk about Oligopolies, about Roosevelt(Teddy) trying to do something about that , but at the end the biggest of all(the Fed) being created in 1913.

They need to talk about Africa and middle East, and India colonies and commerce at the time.

But this has a problem: It is not as easy as "blame the Germans!"

"The second precaution that would make the world safer is a more active American foreign policy. "

Oh yeah, again.

"Barack Obama has pulled back in the Middle East—witness his unwillingness to use force in Syria. "

Wow, this is the better line of all. If something Syria has shown us is the willingness of US to use force in Syria, only being stopped by China and Russia.

"But unless America behaves as a leader and the guarantor of the world order, it will be inviting regional powers to test their strength by bullying neighbouring countries."

Today the US is the biggest bully of all. If any parallelism is to be extracted from WWs to today is countries like China behaving like the US of the past, as creditors of the world, while the rest of the world overspends and get in as many wars as possible to protect their turf.