NEWS Is the pivot to China a bunch of bullshit?

[Flash]

The GOP has held onto the Nixonian belief that there needs to be some semblance of a functioning relationship between post Soviet Russia and the US to ensure global security. It was really odd to me that our latest national security strategy calls Russia an "acute" threat.

That worked when they were somewhat of an 'honest' actor, not so much nowadays.

Zelenskyy also isn't the great guy he's been made out to be after the conflict started.

While not without flaws he is a much better guy than the murderous thug across the border. Leaders ain't perfect and with his country's very existence is under threat he can have a little leeway, and compared to almost every other Ukrainian leader and many of his contemporary neighbors he has done a damn fine job.

 

[ChuckMK23]

Zelenskyy also isn't the great guy he's been made out to be after the conflict started.

I cant find a reliable non-partisan opinion on this. It seems like political agendas define Zelinski for their own agenda. However, it seems like US policy assigns him the label of a patriotic, virtuous and benevolent leader aligned to Western standards of democracy. Am I being naive? Is there a good counter-point to this view?

 

[Random8145]

There is a blog of a Ukrainian woman I occasionally follow (she lives in the U.S. but immigrated from Ukraine and has family there). She said the Ukrainian people and media are very skeptical of Zelensky and all of their politicians, that you don't have a setup with left-wing media that is very friendly to one party and right-wing media friendly to the other party, that there they all get put through the ringer. So the Ukrainians will likely hold Zelensky to account.

Regarding Trump and China, I remember when Biden/Harris first came into office that people from their administration said Trump had gotten it mostly right on China, just that the particular way he went about it was not their preference.

I think that the question isn't whether we support defense of Taiwan at all, but what that defense looks like with a Trump vs Harris presidency.

Diplomatically and economically, I think that a Trump administration would be more hawkish to China than a Harris administration. Which might have the unintended side effect of pushing China towards conflict.

As for militarily, they're both likely to endorse military initiatives that keep the US outpacing China to deter aggression.

Remember Trump was already President once, so it's not like we don't know how he'd behave with China.

 

[JTS11]

I suspect that while they may be anti-China ("bring back our jobs!" - which isn't going to happen en masse), they generally also could not care less about Taiwan.

Didn't he say those were the ones eating our pets? Why would they do that?

There is a blog of a Ukrainian woman I occasionally follow (she lives in the U.S. but immigrated from Ukraine and has family there).

Seriously???

That's about as authoritative as posting my Aunt Becky's thoughts on domestic energy policy, bc she once worked at a gas station.

 

[Swanee]

I suspect that while they may be anti-China ("bring back our jobs!" - which isn't going to happen en masse), they generally also could not care less about Taiwan.

This.

And any tariffs on Chinese products will just hurt Americans, as we don't have any other options but to buy Chinese manufactured products.

The smart thing would be to prop up Mexican industry and manufacturing capabilities, and shift the economic benefit to companies that move their manufacturing there. Or we support manufacturing in industrializing ASEAN countries.

We can move our manufacturing out of China, but it will take a while to set up the capability. And I don't think it will ever truly come back to America. Maybe I'm wrong.

 

[JTS11]

This.

And any tariffs on Chinese products will just hurt Americans, as we don't have any other options but to buy Chinese manufactured products.

The smart thing would be to prop up Mexican industry and manufacturing capabilities, and shift the economic benefit to companies that move their manufacturing there. Or we support manufacturing in industrializing ASEAN countries.

We can move our manufacturing out of China, but it will take a while to set up the capability. And I don't think it will ever truly come back to America. Maybe I'm wrong.

IIRC wouldn't TPP have helped with what you' posted. Unfortunately, domestic populist political pressures on the far left and right killed it.

 

[Random8145]

That's about as authoritative as posting my Aunt Becky's thoughts on domestic energy policy, bc she once worked at a gas station.

Not necessarily. Her having family there, having lived there (born and raised there and during the latter stages of the Soviet Union), gone to university there, and speaking the language and following the media there gives her insight that most Americans don't have. Also I am talking about her statements about the Ukrainian media and how it and the Ukrainian people view their politicians, not her opinion on something like Ukrainian military planning.

 

[number9]

This.

And any tariffs on Chinese products will just hurt Americans, as we don't have any other options but to buy Chinese manufactured products.

The smart thing would be to prop up Mexican industry and manufacturing capabilities, and shift the economic benefit to companies that move their manufacturing there. Or we support manufacturing in industrializing ASEAN countries.

We can move our manufacturing out of China, but it will take a while to set up the capability. And I don't think it will ever truly come back to America. Maybe I'm wrong.

American consumers can't have it both ways: you can't have cheap goods (yay for cost of living!) at the same time as high wages (yay for being rich!) while also having a robust domestic manufacturing base for consumer goods.

Despite former President Trump's statements to the contrary (as well as Senator Vance's), tariffs are a tax paid by consumers. Similarly, you can't say one of your goals is low inflation if you also want an across-the-board tariff of 10% to 20% on imported goods. Republicans continue to think the laws of economics don't apply to them...

 

[Random8145]

This.

And any tariffs on Chinese products will just hurt Americans, as we don't have any other options but to buy Chinese manufactured products.

The smart thing would be to prop up Mexican industry and manufacturing capabilities, and shift the economic benefit to companies that move their manufacturing there. Or we support manufacturing in industrializing ASEAN countries.

We can move our manufacturing out of China, but it will take a while to set up the capability. And I don't think it will ever truly come back to America. Maybe I'm wrong.

The United States is one of the world's largest manufacturers as is.. Yes we had a lot of manufacturing go to China and other countries, but we still manufacture a HUGE amount of stuff right here. Most of it is higher-margin, industrial componentry, all manner of things essential to the functioning of the economy and society but not generally stuff you will find at the likes of Target and Wal-Mart. One thing that is made in China a lot that we need to move somewhere else is a lot of our pharmaceuticals.

Regarding tariffs on China, that depends. China has had a strategy of subsidizing certain industries and then flooding the market with under priced products from said industry so as to kill off competitors in the U.S. Some of these industries are critical to national security, for example steel and aluminum. The Chinese had been flooding industry with very cheap steel and aluminum, in a bid to dominate those industries but also likely to kill them off in the United States in particular. Losing our domestic sneaker or T-shirt manufacturing to China is one thing, but industries like steel and aluminum are critical to infrastructure and defense. So Trump was right to put tariffs on the Chinese over those IMO. Critics at the time accused him of starting a trade war with China, which I found perplexing as he was responding to the trade war that China had/has long been conducting against the U.S. He sought a decent balance in the end I think because he ended up criticizing the argument of using national security to restrict companies from doing business with China. GE Aviation was nervous he would stop them from being able to sell jet engines to China, and he said no, that America is open for business and the national security argument gets used too much.

Regarding the TPP, Trump's argument was that engaging in a large multilateral deal was foolish because if one member starts cheating, it is hard to do much about it, whereas if you negotiate individual deals with all of the countries, then if any one country cheats, you can cancel the deal. I don't know if he was right or wrong ultimately there, but it is an interesting point.

 

[Spekkio]

Tariff proposals are an economic sanction on China in different packaging so we don't insult Mr. Xi too much. This is because China has used US dollars to build up the second largest Navy in the world.

They need to be viewed through a lens of national security and not economic theory.

You can simultaneously believe in free trade while acknowledging that the US needs to cut ties with a Xi Jinping China.... which is why that's been our policy for the last 12 years.

 

[Random8145]

I also do think the MAGAs would support coming to Taiwan's aid even if they dont care about Taiwan itself because Taiwan is the global center of computer chip manufacturing, and so China controlling that would be too dangerous to allow.

 

[robav8r]

Eh. Do you think most of the MAGA movement would support defense of Taiwan? Philippines? Oppose expansion into South China Sea at large? I think most would say "no."

Ah yes, the always dangerous, monolithic MAGA deplorables . . . .

 

[MIDNJAC]

There is a blog of a Ukrainian woman I occasionally follow (she lives in the U.S. but immigrated from Ukraine and has family there). She said the Ukrainian people and media are very skeptical of Zelensky and all of their politicians

Says one random person from the internet, who very well might be getting paid by the SVR. Or perhaps is a russian sympathizer on her own. I'm not saying some people don't feel the way she does. All of russia probably does, for one. But I think we are entirely not skeptical enough of things we read on the internet these days. It's 99% BS or propaganda. All of it. We no longer sit back and think, what might be the motivations of this person, and why might I be seeing this? There is a personal touch that somehow makes us not consider the actual legitimacy of the source. It happens every day to Gen X people on FB who probably can't even use a keyboard properly (pecking one key at a time with their index finger like some 85 yr old meridian sim instructor writing a grade sheet)

 

[Random8145]

Says one random person from the internet, who very well might be getting paid by the SVR. Or perhaps is a russian sympathizer on her own. I'm not saying some people don't feel the way she does. All of russia probably does, for one. But I think we are entirely not skeptical enough of things we read on the internet these days. It's 99% BS or propaganda. All of it. We no longer sit back and think, what might be the motivations of this person, and why might I be seeing this? There is a personal touch that somehow makes us not consider the actual legitimacy of the source. It happens every day to Gen X people on FB who probably can't even use a keyboard properly (pecking one key at a time with their index finger like some 85 yr old meridian sim instructor writing a grade sheet)

I think you misunderstood my post. When I said she said the Ukrainian media and people are skeptical of Zelensky and all of their poliicians, I didn't mean she is saying the Ukrainian people think Zelensky is bad or are anti-Zelensky, but rather that no particular politician or political party gets any special treatment from the Ukrainian press. It is true that she's a random person, but that doesn't strike me as something to lie about. It could also be her honest opinion of Ukrainian media whereas others from Ukraine might disagree. She is absolutely no Russian sympathizer though, she is all for Ukraine laying waste to the Russian military.

Since I've mentioned her, here is her blog if you are curious: LINK

 

[DanMa1156]

Ah yes, the always dangerous, monolithic MAGA deplorables . . . .

Am I wrong? I am not calling them deplorables, but in a party whose policy positions revolve around “America first,” where does defense of Taiwan/Phikippines/SE Asia fit in? Serious question.