Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Modern Collapsology

General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.

Re: Modern Collapsology

Unread postby ralfy » Sat 24 Oct 2020, 19:48:19

According to data from the WB, 71 pct of people worldwide live on less than $10 daily.

https://money.cnn.com/2015/07/08/news/e ... ow-income/

That means collapse took place long before "collapsology" was even considered.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5173
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Modern Collapsology

Unread postby Newfie » Sat 24 Oct 2020, 19:57:56

Ralfy,

That is a really good point, much of what we identify as “collapse” is a western culture thing.

So here is my question; that other roughly 5 billion living on under $10/day, how much of their food comes from the top 2.5 billion people? Are they primarily sufficient? Or do they rely upon the wet for sustenance? Will our collapse push them over the edge?
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 15536
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Modern Collapsology

Unread postby AdamB » Sat 24 Oct 2020, 20:23:19

REAL Green wrote:
AdamB wrote:Okay...so...can you explain how your or mine gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, natural gas or electricity use has been of lesser quality over the past 20 years during this time of decreasing value?


LOL, The value decline is the fact that the best and easiest hydrocarbon have been produced for the most part.


LOL indeed.

Define "best" please. And "easiest".

It took Drake maybe 3 weeks to drill a well to 70', which produced a couple barrels per day?

A Bakken well can kick out 15,000 feet of measured depth in 2 weeks, and can make a thousand or two barrels per day.

I need YOUR context for these relative words to have any hope as to understanding if you know anything about which you speak, or just say relative and meaningless words on this topic because you haven't thought about any of it for longer than the 5 seconds it takes you to make your original energy claim....a baseless one if you haven't in fact put the most basic empirical on it as I just did.

REAL Green wrote:The final product is not an issue although my gas has lower quality becuase of ethanol for many applications on the farm but that is another discussion.


The lower "quality" of which you speak isn't because of the change in base hydrocarbons involved, but because of legislatively required blending changes. The output fuel is REQUIRED to be inferior, it wasn't made that way because of a lower quality hydrocarbon input.

REAL Green wrote: Nothing earth shattering about this macro value issue.


That is the point I am making, yes. Thanks for arriving there so quickly.

REAL Green wrote:You know it and I know it but you just want to arguing semantics.


I'm not the one claiming "best" and "easiest" as any kind of argument for my point. I do numbers, data analytics, and you know, understanding real live energy flows, use and economics instead.

REAL Green wrote:Depletion of the best in regards to the production cost but also increasingly the quality of the hydrocarbon source is fully evident.


Sure...and "best" to you means what? Stuff you like because you got into collapse, decades after it was supposed to have happened, you missed that in your research and settled on decline as a comfortable replacement after you found out (unlike those of us who knew in that advance) that peak oil was a tale sold to faith based believers who are suckers for that kind of stuff?

Do you even understand that hydrocarbon depletion in the US has been going on variously since 1821 for natural gas and 1859 for oil and yeah, and depleting ourselves faster than about any other producing province to become the world's sole hyperpower, and then come back half a century and do it ALL OVER AGAIN? Give that fact more than a seconds worth of thought and explain how it fits into your "best" and "easiest" all being devoured without a single consumer in the country noticing how poorly their energy lifestyles were effected.

REAL Green wrote: The economy has succeeded very well using liquids of all sorts to make up for this but that does not change the fact that overall value of the resource has declined with decades of production of a finite resource. A more expensive production process is my idea of lower macro value


Conversion of liquid hydrocarbons can be thought of nothing but basic chemical engineering. Now you can define "value" in the context of your as yet undefined "best" and easiest", if you want to sew all this together into anything someone outside of your mind can hope to understand.
StarvingPuutyTat says: I'm so confident in my TOTAL COLLAPSE is IMMINENT prediction that I stake my entire reputation on it. It will happen this year. - Aug 3-2020
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 5416
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26

Re: Modern Collapsology

Unread postby AdamB » Sat 24 Oct 2020, 20:28:03

ralfy wrote:That means collapse took place long before "collapsology" was even considered.


Yeah, it was called The Dark Ages. We know.
StarvingPuutyTat says: I'm so confident in my TOTAL COLLAPSE is IMMINENT prediction that I stake my entire reputation on it. It will happen this year. - Aug 3-2020
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 5416
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26

Re: Modern Collapsology

Unread postby REAL Green » Sun 25 Oct 2020, 07:16:47

AdamB wrote:I need YOUR context for these relative words to have any hope as to understanding if you know anything about which you speak, or just say relative and meaningless words on this topic because you haven't thought about any of it for longer than the 5 seconds it takes you to make your original energy claim....a baseless one if you haven't in fact put the most basic empirical on it as I just did.


Please spare me your emotions of wanting so bad to pick apart something. You start looking absurd after your third round. You are not a tough guy you are a wannabe. I have been following both sides for years. Hydrocarbon value is down. Physics tells us it will be. This is issue is quite elementary. You make it into something deep and hidden knowledge of the few as if you are the gifted one. Empirical? LMFAO


AdamB wrote:The lower "quality" of which you speak isn't because of the change in base hydrocarbons involved, but because of legislatively required blending changes. The output fuel is REQUIRED to be inferior, it wasn't made that way because of a lower quality hydrocarbon input.


No shit Sherlock, how long did it take for you to figure that out. Did you dig deep into your deep empirical mind to argue that point. See the problem with you comment hit men is you try to hard to gotcha and instead get the gotcha

AdamB wrote:That is the point I am making, yes. Thanks for arriving there so quickly.


DITTO Einstein

AdamB wrote:I'm not the one claiming "best" and "easiest" as any kind of argument for my point. I do numbers, data analytics, and you know, understanding real live energy flows, use and economics instead.


You don’t use numbers and data. You use emotions. We are talking something so simple and elementary and you are making this into something complex with deep science. What a joke.

AdamB wrote:I Sure...and "best" to you means what? Stuff you like because you got into collapse, decades after it was supposed to have happened, you missed that in your research and settled on decline as a comfortable replacement after you found out (unlike those of us who knew in that advance) that peak oil was a tale sold to faith based believers who are suckers for that kind of stuff? .


Basically, you are trying to tell me decline is not a valid look at what is going on in the world today? You are saying exploring topics from all angles is not valid? You are right and others wrong. I think you have put a good description on a self-centered self-righteous personality who is more concerned about being op top than being right. Nothing about your comments impresses me. I follow them a little bit. Watching you attack Army is a good example of your personality disorder.

AdamB wrote: Give that fact more than a seconds worth of thought and explain how it fits into your "best" and "easiest" all being devoured without a single consumer in the country noticing how poorly their energy lifestyles were effected.



There you go with a shallow emotional response instead of the hard physics of lower quality. Consumers don’t know the difference but the EROI shows those who dig deeper that the return on a depleting resource is going down as the best and easiest is used up. How friggin stupid can one be. You get the prize Mr. Adam. LMFAO. This whole discussion is really boring and a waste of my time but I enjoy seeing a hit man shoot himself in the leg and whine while he is bleeding. I have moved on from PO long ago in regards to decline process but it is still very much part of the process. You are obviously stuck in that anti-PO stage of trying over and over to say “I told you so”


AdamB wrote: Conversion of liquid hydrocarbons can be thought of nothing but basic chemical engineering. Now you can define "value" in the context of your as yet undefined "best" and easiest", if you want to sew all this together into anything someone outside of your mind can hope to understand.


Chemical engineering cost money. It requires a return. It lives in an economy with other systems and networks. If you think best, easiest, and value are the wrong words you just showed how dumb you are. Your effort to take me down just left egg on your face.
realgreenadaptation.blog
User avatar
REAL Green
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1012
Joined: Thu 09 Apr 2020, 05:29:28
Location: MO Ozarks

Re: Modern Collapsology

Unread postby AdamB » Sun 25 Oct 2020, 11:04:39

REAL Green wrote: You are not a tough guy you are a wannabe. I have been following both sides for years. Hydrocarbon value is down. Physics tells us it will be.


Says the guy who can't define "easy" or "high". Thanks, but I'll stick with exactly those physics, and grant you the mindless philosophizing best on the topic.

REAL Green wrote:
AdamB wrote:I'm not the one claiming "best" and "easiest" as any kind of argument for my point. I do numbers, data analytics, and you know, understanding real live energy flows, use and economics instead.


You don’t use numbers and data. You use emotions.


It might seem that way to someone who can't explain what they mean when they say "best" and "easiest". I can assure you that those of us who can formulate a quick and accurate well example, versus those that can't, separates the wheat from the chaff quick obviously.

REAL Green wrote: We are talking something so simple and elementary and you are making this into something complex with deep science. What a joke.


I can understand why those without a clue as to the basics of how science work might feel that way,

REAL Green wrote: Nothing about your comments impresses me.


You presume a motive on my part. I've been in this game longer than you have, I am well aware of the psychological characteristics of the audience, their technical limitations, the probability of your inability to even quantify some small example of your own words, and all the rest of it.

REAL Green wrote:There you go with a shallow emotional response instead of the hard physics of lower quality.


Says the guy who can't define "lower". I provided an example, with numbers, so a kindergartener can point here and there, to explain bigger and lower. Please apply your relative concepts to the example provided to demonstrate you know...well....anything.
StarvingPuutyTat says: I'm so confident in my TOTAL COLLAPSE is IMMINENT prediction that I stake my entire reputation on it. It will happen this year. - Aug 3-2020
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 5416
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26

Re: Modern Collapsology

Unread postby REAL Green » Sun 25 Oct 2020, 11:22:13

AdamB wrote:Says the guy who can't define "easy" or "high". Thanks, but I'll stick with exactly those physics, and grant you the mindless philosophizing best on the topic.



Boring. LOL. Is that all you got wise guy? Getting all technical on a really elementary topic makes you look pretty lacking in the grey matter area.


AdamB wrote:It might seem that way to someone who can't explain what they mean when they say "best" and "easiest". I can assure you that those of us who can formulate a quick and accurate well example, versus those that can't, separates the wheat from the chaff quick obviously.


Then why haven’t you formulated a quick and accurate response? LMFAO. Your problem is you are trying too hard to attack me with a lame and low IQ topic. You haven’t used numbers are science here. You are all emotional because you want so bad to get me. Your low self confidence needs these kinds of perceived victories.

AdamB wrote:I can understand why those without a clue as to the basics of how science work might feel that way,


Translation: I am very very mad so I will tell him he does not know the basics of science!!!!!!!!!!!

AdamB wrote:You presume a motive on my part. I've been in this game longer than you have, I am well aware of the psychological characteristics of the audience, their technical limitations, the probability of your inability to even quantify some small example of your own words, and all the rest of it.


LMFAO again, now he is saying he is not only smarter on a lame low IQ topic but has been here longer so that makes him even better. My Gawd, dummy, give it up you are just pissing all over yourself.

AdamB wrote:Says the guy who can't define "lower". I provided an example, with numbers, so a kindergartener can point here and there, to explain bigger and lower. Please apply your relative concepts to the example provided to demonstrate you know...well....anything.


AH, who said I couldn’t define lower? Where was that talked about and who the frig cares? I am just having fun with a guy who thinks he is so smart but instead looks like a fool. I must be a huge threat to you by the way you are coming after me. VICTORY!
realgreenadaptation.blog
User avatar
REAL Green
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1012
Joined: Thu 09 Apr 2020, 05:29:28
Location: MO Ozarks

Re: Modern Collapsology

Unread postby Ibon » Sun 25 Oct 2020, 11:25:42

and now we get to watch two posters demonstrate their talents to debate in a warm humane gracious manner. Have fun guys.
Patiently awaiting the pathogens. Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 9128
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Re: Modern Collapsology

Unread postby AdamB » Sun 25 Oct 2020, 11:39:48

REAL Green wrote:
AdamB wrote:Says the guy who can't define "lower". I provided an example, with numbers, so a kindergartener can point here and there, to explain bigger and lower. Please apply your relative concepts to the example provided to demonstrate you know...well....anything.


AH, who said I couldn’t define lower?


You, as best I can tell. I put out a perfectly reasonable example with numbers posts and posts ago, just to make sure I had a working idea anyone could hang their hat on.

You apparently even lack the hat.
StarvingPuutyTat says: I'm so confident in my TOTAL COLLAPSE is IMMINENT prediction that I stake my entire reputation on it. It will happen this year. - Aug 3-2020
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 5416
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26

Re: Modern Collapsology

Unread postby Newfie » Sun 25 Oct 2020, 12:39:48

You two stop or go to your room.

Seriously.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 15536
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Modern Collapsology

Unread postby Armageddon » Sun 25 Oct 2020, 15:54:52

Newfie wrote:You two stop or go to your room.

Seriously.




That’s all this Adam clown has in his life.
User avatar
Armageddon
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6430
Joined: Wed 13 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: St.Louis, Mo

Re: Modern Collapsology

Unread postby Newfie » Sun 25 Oct 2020, 16:25:09

You THREE stop it.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 15536
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Modern Collapsology

Unread postby ralfy » Sun 25 Oct 2020, 22:01:01

Newfie wrote:Ralfy,

That is a really good point, much of what we identify as “collapse” is a western culture thing.

So here is my question; that other roughly 5 billion living on under $10/day, how much of their food comes from the top 2.5 billion people? Are they primarily sufficient? Or do they rely upon the wet for sustenance? Will our collapse push them over the edge?


Other sources reveal that only a few large corporations control much of food processing worldwide, with production heavily dependent on mechanized agriculture. In general, large amounts of energy and material resources are needed to provide basic needs even to the 71 pct of the population. That's because the 29 pct rely on them not only for labor but even for earnings: in capitalism, the bulk of wealth of the 29 pct is virtual, and its value can only be maintained or can grow if more of the 71 pct work and buy. Put simply, capitalists need not only workers but also consumers, and it just so happens that those consumers are also workers.

Put simply, the few can get what they want only if most can get what they need, and the few can become richer (which is what they want) only if most get more than what they need.

Since most people always want more, then they have to keep saying to themselves that such an arrangement can continue indefinitely. That's why they are either ignorant of or completely reject realities such as peak oil, environmental damage, and climate change, if not argue that are easy and quick solutions to them.

How much more is needed? In the past, the bulk of the world's population were living on only a dollar or two daily. Now, it's more, and many of them are young and ambitious, and are eager to earn and spend more. Meanwhile, capitalists who earn from them want them to do so because it leads to higher profits and returns on investment.

And what's getting in their way is physical reality.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5173
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Modern Collapsology

Unread postby AdamB » Thu 29 Oct 2020, 15:39:19

ralfy wrote:That means collapse took place long before "collapsology" was even considered.


A country not growing out of their Third World status isn't a post collapse thing. It is a Third World country thing. If they wish to happily remain the way they are, it isn't about collapse having ever happened to them. It is the way of life they choose. The Amish aren't trying to become financial accountants or looking forward to getting law degrees and moving into running local government, they are who and what they are.

Like Third World countries. If they don't like who/what/where they are, I recommend immigrating to the places where, you know, stuff is happening.
StarvingPuutyTat says: I'm so confident in my TOTAL COLLAPSE is IMMINENT prediction that I stake my entire reputation on it. It will happen this year. - Aug 3-2020
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 5416
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26

Re: Modern Collapsology

Unread postby REAL Green » Fri 30 Oct 2020, 06:29:40

This is a great article that explains the Marxist/fascist far left with their support and their goals. This is a fascinating merging of history in a 21st century techno-modern reality. The tools of the past are being assembled and applied with extreme efficiency mainly because of the techno modern environment we are in. Capital and the digital message can instantly be applied as needed. A long-term planting of operatives at all level local and federal is now complete through the 8 years of Obama corruption. This new force now permeates all power structures. It has all the finance it needs. It has the foot soldiers. It has the outlets of information controlled. It has intel and much of the federal law enforcement. This is truly Orwellian because there will be no compromise now. Control will soon be complete. The result will likely be a civil war. Maybe it remains cold overall but definitely hot where the important nodes of power are located. This is the most dangerous time in world history because of the size and reach of the US and its military. Everyone should be afraid who loves freedoms. China is there. The US will mirror China with a US flavoring.

“Plutocrat Violence And Election-Night Horror: Marxian Analysis Shows That Antifa Is Fascist”
https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/ ... a-fascist/

“In the simplest possible terms, Antifa is fascist because while they use some of the talking points and imagery of the old left, they actually work towards a plutocratic coup (or counter-revolution) against the republic. This is not to say there is a system-wide fascist threat, for reasons we will explain in an upcoming installment. In short, the coming coup against republican norms will not establish ‘fascism’ as historically understood, but a new kind techno-industrial repressive society within the rubric of post-modernity, which has hitherto not been contemplated rigorously outside of small circles of futurists and science fiction authors. Antifa and BLM protests have generally disappeared from the simulated reality of the controlled media lens, because these riots did not have the intended effect of delegitimizing the Trump administration, instead working against Joe Biden and Kamala Harris…What defined them as fascists in Marxian terms was not the self-professed utopian, futurist, religious, socialist, or reactionary beliefs of this or that member of the movement, but by the objective material and financial reality of being backed by the plutocracy against the public, itself. All the while posing as guardians of the public…Marxian analysis requires that we assess a movement by a.) Its material base, meaning which class empowers it and makes it possible (finances it) and b.) In whose class interest they work to empower. The answer for both here is the plutocracy. Because they pose as ‘revolutionary left’ but are in fact plutocratic, means they are fascist…Their Tactics Are Taken From Fascism Of course the fascism of Antifa is visible to many, because of its gang-stalking and arson, the mob intimidation of citizens and small businesses to support this nascent totalitarian movement. To force passersby to raise the fist just as eighty-five years ago, Germans and Italians were identically forced to give the Roman salute, is only a corroborating piece of anecdata, and not the root of the reasoning that Antifa is fascist in nature. But insofar as the Antifa mob and BLM leadership situates itself ostensibly in Marxism, this is perhaps even more dangerous for the reasons we’ve explained. And yet it is Marxian analysis itself which is best suited to demonstrate that even at a theoretical level, Antifa is fascist…Unlike the old left, rooted in radically independent organized labor, Antifa’s leadership and activities, to the contrary, are financed through billionaire oligarchs both directly and indirectly, like George Soros and Michael Bloomberg…Fascism is a matter of methods, of tactics, and of financing – not of symbols, explicit ideology, or specific positions on culture-war (wedge) issues. That said, Griffin’s point that fascism no longer has the ability to mobilize a mass movement in the way it did prior to WWII, but that it can carry on as a smaller phenomenon that can inspire terrorism, is agreed. Many of his reasons for stating so are incorrect, even if this conclusion is apt…Both the traditional radical left and fascist right were proponents of violence towards political goals, even if in self-defense, but the traditional radical left used to focus on ‘punching up’: Attacking capital, the ruling class, the banks, big land owners. But historic fascism in its late-nascent stage is more similar to Maoism during the Cultural Revolution (there’s a strong New Left orientation to Maoism as well). It organizes and concentrates power by ‘punching down’. This dangerous fascistic trend among what has come to be known as ‘the left’. At the level of universities, it began in the late 90’s when coastal university classrooms became ‘call-out sessions’. It moved into mass culture through venture-capital funded click-bait websites like Buzzfeed and Jezebel. Of course all of these antics would have been unrecognizably alien to militant rank-and-file labor union members in decades past. That Antifa punches down and that mainstream media echoes their talking points, and that public service announcements are increasingly indistinguishable from Antifa propaganda, is a clear sign of its fascist essence. Punching down is always from a position of power, and its appropriation by the overt sections of power is a clear sign that their ideas have become what the French Marxist Althousser called the Ideological State Apparatus: That anything and everything outside of nebulous, ever-changing shibboleths (i.e. ‘community standards’) can potentially be called ‘fascist’ as a justification for ‘cancel culture’ and black-listing, is precisely that which the growing ‘illiberal liberalism’ of the plutocrats indeed flourishes on…Like Fascists, Antifa Relies on Support from Local Law Enforcement, Local Business, and an Entrenched Local Political Class to Place Them ‘Above the Law’ Perhaps you’ve seen old film reel of Nazis in the 1920’s in paramilitary uniform, long before they had official power in the governmental sense, seemingly able to physically attack those they wanted at whim, without local authorities intervening…When we understand that their ability to operate ‘above the law’ in many cases, find large groups of philanthropically minded lawyer’s groups (like the National Lawyers’ Guild) to work to have their charges dropped, district attorneys who are lenient, and the media industrial complex including monopoly social media, all work in coordinated fashion to enable the Antifa organization…Perhaps it is ironic that Marxian analysis itself is best able to demonstrate that Antifa – whose members often describe themselves as Marxists (socialists, communists, etc.) – is in fact fascist.”
realgreenadaptation.blog
User avatar
REAL Green
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1012
Joined: Thu 09 Apr 2020, 05:29:28
Location: MO Ozarks

Re: Modern Collapsology

Unread postby Plantagenet » Fri 30 Oct 2020, 23:37:17

REAL Green wrote:Perhaps it is ironic that Marxian analysis itself is best able to demonstrate that Antifa – whose members often describe themselves as Marxists (socialists, communists, etc.) – is in fact fascist.”


It makes perfect sense to me. Marxist Leninist states like the Soviet Union, Albania, North Korea, etc. etc. were dictatorships that governed for decades in the late 20th century much like the fascist dictatorships in Germany and Italy did in the 1930s. In fact, its useful to think of fascist states as "black fascists" and communist states as "red fascists"...because there really is very little objective difference between the two.

Antifa resembles nothing so much as the blackshirt street fighters of the Nazis. Antifa has even adopted the same color clothing as the black shirts.

Coincidence?...I think not.

-------------------

Having said that, I don't think the fascist nature of the antifa organization will have much to do with collapse.

We've got much bigger things to worry about.

Cheers!
250 million thousand people have died of covid---Joe Biden
Never underestimate the ability of Joe Biden to f#@% things up---Barack Obama

-----------------------------------------------------------
Keep running between the raindrops.
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 24127
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Modern Collapsology

Unread postby REAL Green » Sun 01 Nov 2020, 07:00:17

First, I do not care for double standards. Double standards and bias deflect the truth. I am an American and China is the biggest threat so this discussion is from an American point of view. It goes with the territory of what the US is doing and has done to be a target of China. This longish article is a must read for those interested in where geopolitical movements will be in the next decade. This will likely be a period as dangerous or more than the US Soviet cold war mainly because the world is much further along with delocalization from globalism. China and the US are bent of global hegemony. This will at some point inevitably clash. How far this clash cascades is up for debate. The two nations have dangerous dependence on each other in regards to war. The Chinese are much more reckless mainly because the US has had hegemony and it now stands to lose it whereas China sees a clear opportunity to gain it. China with its population control likely has the advantage of forcing its population to sacrifice. Expect China to call the moves and the US respond. In my opinion a Sino American conflict will collpase the world as we know it. Maybe not collpase but intense decline in affluence and security.

“Is China An Existential Threat To America?”
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/1670 ... ial-threat

“So is China merely a competitor, or is it an enemy? To answer that, I would like to look at four things: First, disease. The People's Republic of China has attacked us with a microbe. This attack shows how, and to what lengths, China will go to injure other societies. Everyone talks about how Chinese generals and admirals are changing the definition of war. Unfortunately, we now have an example of how they are doing so. China's unrestricted warfare -- a term Beijing has been using for at least 21 years -- now includes biological attack. China's leaders knew for at least five weeks, maybe as much as five months, that the coronavirus was highly contagious, but during this period they propagated the narrative they knew was false. They were telling the world that this was not readily transmissible from one human to the next. Chinese leader Xi Jinping enlisted the World Health Organization in propagating that narrative, which by the way, senior doctors at WHO knew was false. They knew this virus was highly contagious…Beijing is working hard to unseat President Trump. They are doing so not only with their social media feeds but also with their public pronouncements and other efforts…Beijing has unleashed its trolls and its bots against Trump. The New York Times reported in March that Beijing propagated, through social media feeds and text messages, the rumor that President Trump was going to invoke the Stafford Act and lock down the entire United States. Of course, Beijing knew that was false. Beijing has also been running operations and networks, including the one called Spamouflage Dragon, which relentlessly attacked the president. YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter have since taken down that network. China's effort is massive. We have seen periodically American social media companies take down fake Chinese accounts. In June alone, Twitter took down 174,000 fake Chinese accounts. That is just one month, one social media platform, 174,000 accounts…This blends into the third topic, which is subversion. TikTok, the wildly popular video sharing app, employs the world's most sophisticated commercially available artificial intelligence. It uses that artificial intelligence to pick videos to send to people…The Chinese Communist Party probably changed public opinion in connection with this spring's riots. Some observers think TikTok got college-attending white women to believe they were oppressed and therefore motivated them to demonstrate…This weaponized propaganda can turn people against one another and also ruin the credibility of their governments. Engineers working for Douyin, TikTok's sister app in China, develop the algorithms for TikTok's use. That is the reason China does not want TikTok sold to an American company: it wants to keep control of that algorithm. The algorithm curates content and can motivate people to do things they otherwise might not do. People believe Beijing "boosted the signal" this June to help a "prank" against President Trump…Radio Free Asia reports that an intelligence unit of the People's Liberation Army actually based themselves in the Houston consulate. Using big data and artificial intelligence, they identified Americans who were likely to participate in Black Lives Matter and Antifa protests. The PLA unit then created videos and sent them out through TikTok. Those videos instructed people how to riot…US Customs and Border Patrol agents seized 900,000 counterfeit one‑dollar bills from China at the International Falls Port of Entry in Minnesota. In China's total surveillance state, no one can counterfeit American currency without Beijing's knowledge, so it appears that this operation had at least the tacit support of the Chinese government. The question is, who counterfeits one‑dollar bills? People certainly do not do that for profit: the cost of counterfeiting those bills and getting them across the Pacific is higher than one dollar…China's military officers are making their "military diplomacy" the diplomacy of the country. We now know that in Beijing, only hostile answers are considered to be politically acceptable. Xi Jinping is under pressure, things are not going his way. Chinese leaders, civilians and perhaps military officers as well -- know that there is a closing window of opportunity. This became clear in January when the Xinhua News Agency, the official media outlet, ran a story titled: "Xi Stresses Racing Against Time to Reach Chinese Dream."… The reason this is important is because, up to now, the primary basis of legitimacy of the Chinese Communist Party has been the continual delivery of prosperity. Without the assurance of prosperity, the only remaining basis of legitimacy is nationalism. Nationalism, as a practical matter, means military misadventure abroad. To understand military misadventure abroad, think what is going on in India and what China is doing to threaten Taiwan at this moment…We may think that Xi Jinping should be cautious. Unfortunately, he now has incentives to cause a crisis -- one that for us would be unimaginable…The idea was to be able to get Chinese goods from its east coast over to Europe. These two initiatives have now been amalgamated into the Belt and Road and now span the world. There's a Polar Belt and Road, a Latin American Belt and Road, a Caribbean Belt and Road, and so on. China wants countries to build infrastructure. This is infrastructure generally the private sector would not build. These projects, in general, are not economic. The loans that China extended actually have high interest rates…We know one thing. Every new president will give China a grace period. President Trump did that for about 15 months to try to develop cooperative relationships with Beijing, to see if they could work something out. We know that Xi Jinping did not reciprocate Trump's generous overtures. That is why Trump, starting around the spring of 2018, actually started to impose severe costs on China.”
realgreenadaptation.blog
User avatar
REAL Green
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1012
Joined: Thu 09 Apr 2020, 05:29:28
Location: MO Ozarks

Re: Modern Collapsology

Unread postby ralfy » Sun 01 Nov 2020, 21:44:15

Xi and others are actually pro-reformist, which is why China joined the WTO in 2001 and agreed to buy from the U.S. last January. In short, what most thought was a trade war between the U.S. and China turned out to be a trade deal that China wanted all along:

https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/opinion/ ... hina-trade

Before that, the U.S. had constructed over 800 military bases and installations to surround China and Russia, and they were part of over a century of interventions and dirty tricks:

https://sites.evergreen.edu/zoltan/interventions/

That's why not just China but the rest of BRICS and over forty emerging markets became less trustful of the U.S. and have been attempting to move away from the petrodollar. Even various NATO members and countries like AU and NZ tried the same as they began engaging in more trade deals with BRICS.

The U.S. tried to counter that through more dirty tricks, including attacks on and threats against the Middle East as well as Obama's pivot to Asia, but they all led to more death and suffering as well as failed.

Now, the neolibs/neocons are attempting a comeback, and if they return, expect more attacks on China: the "Chinese virus" of which samples from weeks or months before the pandemic started were found in sewer and even blood samples in various cities in different countries, Chinese disinformation networks parallel to U.S. disinformation networks, etc.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5173
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Modern Collapsology

Unread postby REAL Green » Mon 02 Nov 2020, 05:20:36

ralfy wrote:Xi and others are actually pro-reformist, which is why China joined the WTO in 2001 and agreed to buy from the U.S. last January. In short, what most thought was a trade war between the U.S. and China turned out to be a trade deal that China wanted all along:


Reformist only in their own self-interest to gain hegemony. China is the new danger in the world. China is as bad as US foreign policy now. I would say maybe worse with the release of the virus. It is was a deliberate coverup-up that spread the virus. The Chinese are getting away with this as public opinion moves on. The SCS and Taiwan will be a new danger point for war that will likely destroy the world as we know it. Maybe not collpase but a serious blow to basic economic comforts. None of us are ready for this.
realgreenadaptation.blog
User avatar
REAL Green
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1012
Joined: Thu 09 Apr 2020, 05:29:28
Location: MO Ozarks

Re: Modern Collapsology

Unread postby ralfy » Mon 02 Nov 2020, 21:45:06

REAL Green wrote:Reformist only in their own self-interest to gain hegemony. China is the new danger in the world. China is as bad as US foreign policy now. I would say maybe worse with the release of the virus. It is was a deliberate coverup-up that spread the virus. The Chinese are getting away with this as public opinion moves on. The SCS and Taiwan will be a new danger point for war that will likely destroy the world as we know it. Maybe not collpase but a serious blow to basic economic comforts. None of us are ready for this.


Why would they want to gain hegemony through hard power? They saw what happened to the U.S. when they tried that: soaring debts, a reliance on the petrodollar regime, and the Triffin dilemma, resulting in BRICS and forty emerging markets slowly becoming independent of the same. Even their own NATO allies are now more reluctant to even cooperate in more destabilizing stunts.

As for soft power, the U.S. tried to refashion that in the same way as its hard power tactics, with neoliberalism and structural adjustment tied to loan agreements and financial aid with strings attached. That only lead to misery for many of those emerging markets.

If any, such stunts are part of more "danger points for war" manufactured by none other than the U.S. itself, with over 800 military bases around the world:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAfeYMONj9E
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5173
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

PreviousNext

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests