This is a brilliant, fantastic piece of writing, and, so very sadly, all so true. I know; I was at one time a Dean for Research at a major research university, with a large international student population.
you should be thanking China for believing in climate change and leading the energy transition, investing in renewables, and working to decarbonize the global economy. The faster the US empire collapses the sooner we can start to mitigate carbon emissions.
Yes, the abandonment of renewable energy is another place where China can thank the U.S. We have given them leadership on the energy of the 21st century.
I remember being frustrated about this forfeiture of energy leadership when I first grasped this concept in an 8th grade science class in 2006. I wasn't an exceptional student, yet it was still very clear to me.
Nearly 20 years later and I'm still confused by the inaction (cough cough... fossil fuels industry... cough cough). It's as if many of our politicians don't want the US to be at the cutting edge. Greed for a larger slice of a smaller pie. That, or profound incompetence.
Yeah, the fossil fuel and animal ag/ pharma cartels doubling down on climate change denial will be left stranded by peak oil but the 'empire' aren't collapsing anytime soon. Soon the world is going to be in a very bad state, struggling to feed 8 billion, with mass migrations. Energy is all very well but food is more important.
I'm not so sure we didn't plan to cripple America's competitive advantages deliberately. All evidence points to a concerted strategy to weaken the country on a broad front. They even want us to think of climate change as a hoax. Under the new regime America, is pulling back from the world stage, cedeing leadership in various fields to other nations.
I think Trump/Musk dislike the bureaucrats at the EU, NATO, NIH, WHO, USAID and CIA who self serve and make jobs for themselves. He is ceding leadership directly to billionaire shareholders of the big cartels. There is no "America' just multinational corps controlling our lives and spending.
Your comment might sound like conspiracist ideation, except that the long-term investment strategy of self-interested plutocrats, to privatize as much benefit and socialize as much cost as our society will tolerate, is a matter of public record. From Ross Gelbspan ("The Heat Is On", 1997), to Jane Mayer ("Dark Money", 2016) to Christopher Leonard ("Kochland," 2019: newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/kochland-examines-how-the-koch-brothers-made-their-fortune-and-the-influence-it-bought), exhaustive research by principled investigative journalists, backed by rigorous fact-checking, has laid the story bare for anyone paying attention. For those requiring peer-reviewed analysis, there's Robert Brulle ("Institutionalizing delay: foundation funding and the creation of U.S. climate change counter-movement organizations", 2013: link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-013-1018-7; paywalled, but there are free versions out there). That list of high-profile references only scratches the surface.
Alas, the ROI on the plutocratic campaign to deny not only anthropogenic global warming but organized denial itself, has been highly positive.
The Trump regime is not in the least concerned with US advantage or even national wellbeing. It’s only about increasing personal power and wealth for those at the top The primary aim of all their policies is to destroy liberal democracy everywhere.
While I agree with your analysis, I do think this accidentally demonizes China, and that it doesn't have to be a bad thing to cede global scientific/technological leadership to that country. I don't think we will get worse advancements if they are Chinese and not American. They have a robot wandering around the dark side of the moon and that's pretty cool.
There are certain parts of China that America should compete with, but we don't always have to adjust our priorities because "China is beating us." So they are beating us? That's fine.
Kevin, I like the last part of your analysis. China is indeed not an unmitigated bad guy that we have to reflexively oppose. I suspect that they will naturally take the lead increasingly and I don't see it as a zero-sum game between our two great nations.
Yes, quite. The US has funded China's massive growth. And they can enjoy it for maybe 5 to 10 years or so before it becomes too hot to grow food and the soils are depleted from so much fertiliser and GMO tech, stealing tomorrow's genetic vigour for today.
No economy, socialist, neoliberal or MAGA, based on growth is sustainable. All growth, whether in AI, renewables, carbon capture or medicine, and whether in the US or BRICS, accelerates humanity towards billions dying.
That's why no one talks about the really effective and feasible option of the world going vegan. It would return acres to forest and begin sucking down co2 but it represents degrowth. Millions will lose jobs in animal ag; vets, transport, factory farms, soy and corn crops, slaughter houses, meat rendering and packing and pharma (animal ag is their biggest customer by far) (as well as in pharma from the health benefits of not eating animal fat and protein). The global economy would crash.
But still, you need a habitable world before you can have a healthy economy.
Not disagreeing with all of your statement, but there has been a half dozen of the highest level scientists and researchers from our best institutions that have gone to China. China is enticing top level talent with high salaries, funding, and lovely accommodations, and that is attractive to researchers.
The "nobody wants to move to China to do research" part is not correct. Several people have moved to China to do research.
Most of the scientists going back to China were originally from China (came to US for Ph.D. and stayed here). For a non-native speaker, China is a difficult place to work. However, translation tech is rapidly improving and I suspect that this may change.
If you do not think like me, if you do not look like me, if you do not worship like me, if you do not dress like me, if you do not love like me, then you are my enemy. In fact, if you are not me then you are my enemy.
This is a brilliant, fantastic piece of writing, and, so very sadly, all so true. I know; I was at one time a Dean for Research at a major research university, with a large international student population.
you should be thanking China for believing in climate change and leading the energy transition, investing in renewables, and working to decarbonize the global economy. The faster the US empire collapses the sooner we can start to mitigate carbon emissions.
Yes, the abandonment of renewable energy is another place where China can thank the U.S. We have given them leadership on the energy of the 21st century.
I remember being frustrated about this forfeiture of energy leadership when I first grasped this concept in an 8th grade science class in 2006. I wasn't an exceptional student, yet it was still very clear to me.
Nearly 20 years later and I'm still confused by the inaction (cough cough... fossil fuels industry... cough cough). It's as if many of our politicians don't want the US to be at the cutting edge. Greed for a larger slice of a smaller pie. That, or profound incompetence.
I don't think they see it as a competition. China's much more collaborative. They aren't trying to win or be the leader, just solving problems
Yeah, the fossil fuel and animal ag/ pharma cartels doubling down on climate change denial will be left stranded by peak oil but the 'empire' aren't collapsing anytime soon. Soon the world is going to be in a very bad state, struggling to feed 8 billion, with mass migrations. Energy is all very well but food is more important.
I don't think they intend to try to feed 8B people.
So no one will. Many people, mostly black, brown and latino will starve.
I'm not so sure we didn't plan to cripple America's competitive advantages deliberately. All evidence points to a concerted strategy to weaken the country on a broad front. They even want us to think of climate change as a hoax. Under the new regime America, is pulling back from the world stage, cedeing leadership in various fields to other nations.
I think Trump/Musk dislike the bureaucrats at the EU, NATO, NIH, WHO, USAID and CIA who self serve and make jobs for themselves. He is ceding leadership directly to billionaire shareholders of the big cartels. There is no "America' just multinational corps controlling our lives and spending.
Your comment might sound like conspiracist ideation, except that the long-term investment strategy of self-interested plutocrats, to privatize as much benefit and socialize as much cost as our society will tolerate, is a matter of public record. From Ross Gelbspan ("The Heat Is On", 1997), to Jane Mayer ("Dark Money", 2016) to Christopher Leonard ("Kochland," 2019: newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/kochland-examines-how-the-koch-brothers-made-their-fortune-and-the-influence-it-bought), exhaustive research by principled investigative journalists, backed by rigorous fact-checking, has laid the story bare for anyone paying attention. For those requiring peer-reviewed analysis, there's Robert Brulle ("Institutionalizing delay: foundation funding and the creation of U.S. climate change counter-movement organizations", 2013: link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-013-1018-7; paywalled, but there are free versions out there). That list of high-profile references only scratches the surface.
Alas, the ROI on the plutocratic campaign to deny not only anthropogenic global warming but organized denial itself, has been highly positive.
Very good points!
The Trump regime is not in the least concerned with US advantage or even national wellbeing. It’s only about increasing personal power and wealth for those at the top The primary aim of all their policies is to destroy liberal democracy everywhere.
While I agree with your analysis, I do think this accidentally demonizes China, and that it doesn't have to be a bad thing to cede global scientific/technological leadership to that country. I don't think we will get worse advancements if they are Chinese and not American. They have a robot wandering around the dark side of the moon and that's pretty cool.
There are certain parts of China that America should compete with, but we don't always have to adjust our priorities because "China is beating us." So they are beating us? That's fine.
Kevin, I like the last part of your analysis. China is indeed not an unmitigated bad guy that we have to reflexively oppose. I suspect that they will naturally take the lead increasingly and I don't see it as a zero-sum game between our two great nations.
Yes, quite. The US has funded China's massive growth. And they can enjoy it for maybe 5 to 10 years or so before it becomes too hot to grow food and the soils are depleted from so much fertiliser and GMO tech, stealing tomorrow's genetic vigour for today.
No economy, socialist, neoliberal or MAGA, based on growth is sustainable. All growth, whether in AI, renewables, carbon capture or medicine, and whether in the US or BRICS, accelerates humanity towards billions dying.
That's why no one talks about the really effective and feasible option of the world going vegan. It would return acres to forest and begin sucking down co2 but it represents degrowth. Millions will lose jobs in animal ag; vets, transport, factory farms, soy and corn crops, slaughter houses, meat rendering and packing and pharma (animal ag is their biggest customer by far) (as well as in pharma from the health benefits of not eating animal fat and protein). The global economy would crash.
But still, you need a habitable world before you can have a healthy economy.
Just sayin’ but nobody wants to move to China to do research or start a business. For very obvious reasons.
These immigrants will continue to come to the US. The politics come and go but what remains is the greatest country in the world to build and to live.
Not disagreeing with all of your statement, but there has been a half dozen of the highest level scientists and researchers from our best institutions that have gone to China. China is enticing top level talent with high salaries, funding, and lovely accommodations, and that is attractive to researchers.
The "nobody wants to move to China to do research" part is not correct. Several people have moved to China to do research.
Most of the scientists going back to China were originally from China (came to US for Ph.D. and stayed here). For a non-native speaker, China is a difficult place to work. However, translation tech is rapidly improving and I suspect that this may change.
Yup. Trumpet is a disaster for anyone on our side. And an asset for the other. Damn shame.
If you do not think like me, if you do not look like me, if you do not worship like me, if you do not dress like me, if you do not love like me, then you are my enemy. In fact, if you are not me then you are my enemy.
We shouldn't forget about the other driving forces: land and higher salaries.
These are somewhat impossible for any other countries, even China, given the US is a new country and the dollar is the reserve currency.