upvote
> This is why I laugh every time somebody seriously suggests there's going to be a war with China because the West would collapse without Chinese exports. It's just not going to happen.

> The problem with outsourcing all your manufacturing

Not having a war is a good thing, not a problem.

reply
Critical dependencies on foreign countries can be problematic if those countries start doing things you don't like, for example invading Taiwan.
reply
Why is that the common thinking, China has not even invaded a country for centuries. While the West particularly the USA have destroyed a lot of countries. Taiwan is even part of China since it is a rebel province. I really am curious why this idea is widespread in the USA.
reply
> China has not even invaded a country for centuries.

You should open a history book. Or two.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_Peo...

I find it hard to believe this comment was made in good faith.

reply
China attempted to invade Taiwan several times last century, they just didn't have the naval capability to take even Kinmen.

They are two separate countries now, unless you think North/South Korea are the same, Russia/Ukraine, etc.

reply
> They are two separate countries now

No, they are not. The US legally recognized Taiwan (fka Formosa) as Chinese territory in 1943 and 1945 and legally recognized the PRC as the sole legal government of China in 1979, following a similar recognition by the UN in 1971.

https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12503

There are only 11 countries in the world that recognize Taiwan as a sovereign entity and the largest are Guatemala, Haiti, and Paraguay.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_recognition_of_T...

reply
When you visit Taiwan, do you see any Chinese officials at the border control? Do you have apply for a Chinese visa, or follow Chinese laws in the country?

It is de facto a country, not de jure, for obvious reasons. You can pretend otherwise, but what's the point in engaging in a discussion where you get to invent your own reality?

reply
The Chinese government calling an event the "Peaceful Liberation of Tibet" doesn't negate many others in the world calling the same event the "Chinese invasion of Tibet".

Rinse, Repeat.

reply
It is my understanding that mainland China is the rebel province ;)
reply
China invaded Vietnam in 1979. In response to Vietnam invading Cambodia, to be fair. But that's still an invasion in my book.
reply
And Vietnam's invasion of Cambodia was well justified, as far as these things go. Pol Pot's cross border raids and ongoing genocide of Vietnamese (and other) civilians required a response (see the Ba Chúc massacre).
reply
deleted
reply
Did you forget Tibet?
reply
this idea is widespread everywhere bar China, not just in the USA...something related with free speech
reply
> and destroy any organized labor

Hilariously not any organized labor, just the local group. The largest organized labor group in the history of the world is alive and well, and is headquartered in Beijing.

This was basically just a case of kicking the can down the road really hard. The can is still there, waiting for you, and you are now completely dependent on it (oh and it has nuclear weapons).

reply
Independent labor unions are illegal in China. Are you referring to the ACFTU? That is about as much a labor union as is the 'peoples' republic of china is run by the people. The ACFTU is primarily concerned with industrial output matching state targets and not particularly concerned with worker welfare.
reply
> This is why I laugh every time somebody seriously suggests there's going to be a war with China because the West would collapse without Chinese exports. It's just not going to happen.

Sounds like all the more reason for china to start a war.

Just having one side dependent isn't going to stop war.

reply
Would it? India has some relations with Russia….
reply
> This is why I laugh every time somebody seriously suggests there's going to be a war with China because the West would collapse without Chinese exports. It's just not going to happen.

This is almost the exact same argument that was used to justify economic cooperation with Russia, they’d never start a war in Europe because their economy would collapse!

Ooos.

reply
In hindsight everything is obvious, but it was a close call and there were many moments history could have taken a different route. Sanctions were painful for russia, but so was cutting ties of a lot of industry towards russia in east germany for instance. A bit more cooperation (and maybe less US started wars as a guidance) and all would be quite different.
reply
Thing is, it wasn't hindsight. The US had been warning Europe about the dangers of dependency on Russian energy since at least 2016 through 2-3 administrations (see my other comment for the citations).
reply
Yes and europe was warning the US not to engage with Iraq and now Iran in the way the US did.

Also we read the warning as "don't buy from them, rather buy from us".

And it was extensivly debated in general.

reply
That would be a lot more compelling if we didn’t already know how that story ended. I also think framing this as US-EU competition rather than the EU running its economic engine on cheap Russian fuel is misleading.

The EU kept at it with plans to expand until the war started for the second time and “someone” took it upon themselves to violently sever that link.

reply
Neither the US, nor EU nor russia is a monolithic block. So I try to avoid black and white framing in general. But especially the US warningbefore 2014, when at the same time with surplus fracking gas, not many considered serious. Besides, while everyone was buying from the Saudis and co. So why not russia?

Now at latest by 2014 that should have changed indeed. But even then different approaches would have been possible then cutting all ties and hope this will work out better.

reply
This is ahistorical, at least from the POV of US administrations.

I'm no fan of Donald Trump but this was one of his rare Ws. At a NATO summit in 2018, he warned Europe about the dangers of dependency on Russian energy and basically bullied Germany into building an LNG plant, something that was critical to Europe after Russia invaded Ukraine 4 years later [1].

Biden as Vice President to Obama warned Europe of the same thing in 2016 [2] regarding Nord Stream 2.

So American administrations have consistently and repeatedly warned Europe about the dangers over 6+ years. So how can anyone argue that "[Russia would] never start a war in Europe" when the US said basically that?

[1]: https://archive.ph/4K5BP

[2]: https://www.dw.com/en/biden-warns-europe-against-dependency-...

reply
Yeah both sides of US spectrum told Europe for a decade plus, but when the entire German political class is captured by Russia, what do you even do?
reply