When Bateman refers to the United States, he conflates the ruling US oligarchy with the interests of the American people. This identification has no basis in reality.
What I take away from Dr. Bateman's presentation is that the US policy towards China is driven by a sense of great panic, that the US foreign policy establishment doesn't really know how to respond to this challenge, and that the only thing that it has done with any sense of direction and self-confidence is to scream as loud as possible that no effort must be spared in slowing the rise of China. This situation looks like the Qing Dynasty's reaction to the rise of the West in the 19th century and the history may be repeating itself with the roles reversed this time around (unless the American people wake up and change the direction of the country -- Vote for RFK Jr. for President!).
The Qing Dynasty never worried about the rise of the West as China was self sufficient at that time. Contrary to the situation in the 19th century, China has no intention of conquering the West. If anything, it's the West which could not accept peaceful coexistence of a country as powerful as the West.
a republic can't solve our problems. we have a two party first past the post system. we need to find a minimum violence revolution. we need more direct democracy. we need to flatten the power curve. praying for benevolant dictators might seem like a good strategy for primitive societies, but it won't work for future socieites. we must have more direct democracy.
If you want to win a competition, the more honorable way is to better yourself off, to gear up all your potentials. Instead US wants to drag its competitor down. Despicable.
The job of US multinationals is not about weighting their commerce activities with national security concerns. That is the job of the state. Their job is to grow and succeed.
I think they are starting to have difficulties to compete with Chinese businesses, so they asked the government to help. Just like what happened in the 80s when they had problems competing with Japanese businesses.
@@joseph_wei In the 80s, Japanese businesses thrived on heavy state sponsorship and guidance. The same things happen today for Chinese giant businesses.
@@joseph_wei Not true. American big tech companies made BIG bucks with China, and they suffer a great loss from trade war initiated by US government. Uncle Sam's primary concern with China is strictly about geopolitics than economics.
At the end of the day it is American look down on Chinese that Chinese cannot innovate and invent but forgetting who founded nVidia, TSMC and who is at the helm of AMD.
@@profriday Morris Chang, Jensen Huang and Lisa Su are all Chinese. Their race cannot change. If the US and China continue to co-operate, there could be more Sino-American innovations beyond Nvidia, TSMC and AMD.
@@westhypocrisy Nonesense. US does not suffer from brain drain while China does. The success of these Chinese American is not due to their ethnicity but their nationality.
@@profriday I beg your pardon. Morris Chang was born in Ningbo, and Ningbo is not in ROC. I am sure Lisa's and Jensen's parents were born in China too. Whether ROC or PRC, they are Chinese.
You should talk about America, not China. Do you have any idea what is going on in this country? Leave China alone! They are just our vendors...you want something and get it online from China. Find a solution for America's poverty!
We all know and don't want to talk about it is that it was the Chinese students, first from Taiwan in the mid 60's to the Chinese students after Nixon's visit, those students and the ones that stayed to work took the US digital tech to the top. The recent two presidents thought they could replace these Chinese with Indians. Wishful thinking, the Indian does not have the smarts or imagination to take or keep the US digital industry up at the top. why the panic mode.
Just a clarification: the organization rendered in the transcript as sypheus or cepheus is actually CFIUS, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, q.v.
What is crystal clear is US doesn’t know how to deal with such strong capable competitor. You already admitted that the result will be the same long term anyway. Instead of coming up with childish obstacles, US should start learning how Chinese thinks, its cultural and motivation. The fact that politicians think it’s a zero sum game proves that it’s doubling down on an inevitable you don’t like. Not very smart.
All countries have a firewall. These firewalls are the g4 boundaries. It is not solely a Chinese boundary but the boundariy you see is the g4 boundary.
There is absolutely ZERO difference between Chinese civilian and military like there is in the West. It is hard for us to understand, China is a unified leadership structure. Generals and party officials alike have private business enterprises, and there is no question that business exists to support the state and the party's objectives.
The workers have forced the capitalist to back off from requiring a security clearance to work in an Ice Cream plant. The second witch hunt was begun by FDR before the second Imperialist slaughter of World War 2. "Socialism on Trial" documents the actual courtroom testimony. Socialist Workers Party vs Attorney General put the FBI on trial.
Generals are not allowed to have private businesses in China. I also disagree that businesses exist to support party objectives. State owned businesses maybe, but not private businesses, which are just like private businesses in the US, exist for profit making.
Oh really? Remember the sanction response to Japan. Oh wait… ASML is a Dutch company, did the US sanction the Dutch? Get real. So many examples from the 20th century that refute your ridiculous conclusion.
Might makes right . Successful Communist China and Russia now have enough might to be right. Might makes rules. Successful Communist China and Russia now have enough might to make rules. Might enables sanctions to be imposed. Successful Communist China and Russia now have enough might to impose sanctions. Meritocracy is the future.
Talking about semiconductor, it is not a good decision! 1. American companies need to sale their products to china to make money to finance future product development. 2. When china can't get such product, china will go a the way to find alternative solutions or develop their own. Look at space technology, gps and ev.
@38:06 you could successfully argue that soybeans are FAR more of a strategic resource than semiconductors. The Chinese understand that a lot more than Westerners. Limit FOOD exports, and they will sense a war of necessity, and Western containment will be perceived as Chinese encirclement.
Capitalism therefore has starvation as the price of admission. That's what you always do to those with little to no faith in the system. It may be good policy for capitalist famers but it bad policy for small farmers who would be devastated. Worldwide its workers and small farmers against the big bosses of agribusiness and industry.
@@kimobrien. you forget, though, capitalism is a NECCISSARY evolution and experience shows it cannot be successfully skipped or rushed. Violent transitions do far more harm than good. Modern Danish democratic socialism is about as far as humanity has progressed on it's own without violence, and the living standard for ordinary workers is very high, and career progression and employment mobility is also very good. I will assume that your heart is in the right place, rushing the evolution of human economic and financial development is a recipe for disaster. Socialism is realistically a 1000 year project. Unsatisfying, I know.
@@earth9531 Ya well you seem to have forgotten the years Denmark spent under Hitler. In 1913 Lenin wrote Imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism and that is as true today as it was in 1913. The problem back then is the same as today a Social Democratic leadership unwill to lead any class struggle out of fear of loss of a few privileges. Stalinism didn't represent a revolutionary course but a class collaborationist one were it joined with the Social Democrat leaders and liberals in Popular Fronts Against Fascism that paved the way for fascist victories throughout Europe. You can see that workers in Europe are already ahead of their leaders in France and the UK. Social Democratic traitors like Ebert of Germany have not been forgotten. Social Democratic Bourgeois Democracy can not halt fascism ot another world war only world Socialist Revolution can.
@@earth9531 Defending the US Imperialist in a trade dispute with Capatlism with Chinese Characteristics involving food shows just how utterly rotten and despicable Danish Social Democracy is.
The president Ronald Reagan Admin wanted to bring China up to modern technology. So that they could launch satellite system for SDI system and the global Internet. They have been building and launching sattelites for 40 years. They are very good at what they have been employed to do for the US military. Recently China landed on the dark side of the moon which is a difficult area to land and explore. The first country to land a Rover on the dark side of the moon.
But again fell into the usual narrative that China "learned " from USA. USA had never had the ability to land on the dark side of the moon because that needed to place a communications satellite in a "Halo " orbit at the pole of the moon. USA does not have the technology and it is a Chinese innovation.
We have a department of commerce that has a better idea of the economic conditions and global trade does need equalization consideration for all concerned.
neocons couldnt tie their on shoes without a guy from MIT helping them. Thats why Neocons prefer to sit so their shoes dont fall off. They shuffle when they walk. Now there are shoes made for Neocons and geriatrics which have no laces so I expect the Neocons will be ordering the shiny black ones that look like dress shoes.
Check conclusion chapter. Geopolitical globalism was and is beneficial for all countries. It wil be next to impossible to re-new production of IT hardware or radio-electronics in USA. The labour was retrenched and retraining would be hard. And most of all, yanks hate manufacturing jobs.
So you mean China is about to invade most Asian-Pacific countries and slaughter 10s of millions of people in those countries, including massacre the whole cities of the invaded countries? Because that's what Japan did 1930s-1945.
@@michaelf5410 Sorry, “Made in USA” or decoupling wouldn’t mainly depend on China or it wouldn’t be decided by the “Chinaman”, neither American government. It is your Western capitalists, who are not willing to do so, unless you have strong willingness to drop your salary “voluntarily”. Congras, you had a very beautiful dream. Once you lost it, you couldn’t get it back again. That is the reality of the manufacture supply chains in the world. People’s “greediness” for the higher wage is totally contradicted by the greediness of your capitalism system and capitalists. Your dream couldn’t “come true” unless the most western capitalists are also political brainwashed and become naive or radicals.
To enlarge the point; Brazil & Argentina are currently industrially testing a new strain of wheat. If it proves its worth it changes global power dynamics unseen since the beginning of industrialisation. This supposed rivalry becomes irrelevant. So, I'll stick with my mercantilism 2.0.
Techno Nationalism. Why only China? (Glad the question was asked). I would HOPE the USA would develop guard rails to secure the appropriate (strategic) technologies concerns & fears beyond today's adversaries. Tomorrow it could be some other set of countries. We really need to have a more broader and clearer Grand Strat. on this topic. Very insightful. Highly relevant.
US grand strategy should be how to improve itself and not containing others. Yesterday was Japan, today is China, tomorrow could be India. Even if you lost number one, you could catch up and win again if you concentrate on improving yourself. In decline and hope others won't catch up with you is not the most effective.
It's really naive to believe that only the US could control certain technologies. Fundamentally technologies are based on science and the principal of science is public knowledge, so China or other countries would catch up with the leader sooner or later.
Being in a real university environment is truly wonderful. The US Export Control framework is so broad that telephone calls and other transmissions out of the US implicates this law.
When American and most other foreign companies obey intellectual property(IP) laws, but Chinese firms do not- it doesn't just equalize Chinese firms with the IP holder, it catapults them into first. The hierarchy of advantages favor the thieves then the originators and everyone else at the bottom of the heap. This is unsustainable and why the business realm is increasingly waking up even if the political class are ahead of them in realizing the need for change in the relationship.
IP enforcement is just rent seeking activity and imposition of artificial scarcity. Unlike commodities, finished goods, etc. "IP" can be distributed limitlessly. So why isnt it?
@@nathanderks5486 According to the US Constitutional theory IP is suppose to encourage the flourishing of the arts and sciences not be a source of billions in profits for owners.
It takes a lot of effort and ingenuity to invent something that people need and/or want in large amounts and that can be profitably made. It takes much less effort to steal that labor.
The cause of the rise in increasing authoritarianism in China is internal instability and it may be occurring in the States as well. This instability may have many historical causes but the most important cause to consider, to focus on, I think, is climate-change. Nature's 'campaign' will eventually convince more people its real, if it has not already. And governments should know its real by studying simple trends. There is nothing that threatens the sovereignty of all nations more then the alien weather threats of nature...we need to understand and predict these threats, and organize ourselves geopolitically around the issue of climate change. I urge the Department of defense to cooperate on the issue of climate change, and for the Chinese Imperial Academy of Sciences to specifically cooperate with NASA on the scientific understanding of climate change. Just as a starting point. Geopolitically we need to develop a synergistic, non-zero-sum security pact similar to a security-arms pact that guarantees security for affected sovereigns and designates foreign help from countries less affected by climate change...and if we do this correctly we should be able get cooperation back to the way things were in terms of openness between China and US. We need to learn to accept responsibility for historical grievances by going forward reliably in honest dedicated relationships that are committed to protecting sovereigns, in exchange for being protected by them... unless America thinks it will never be in a a situation where it needs foreign aid, even as the debt ceiling is squeezing our heads in the face of de-dollarization. When I consider Tech Giganticism, I understand why it's important to have an edge so that we can continue to dominate and be a force for good in the world, but even as we dominated it was never clear to me that we were actually doing good work. Perhaps it was self-analysis using the products of Tech Giants that made us see this... Now considering China is doing new work technologically that seems to circumnavigate the need for semiconductors...while we develop an 'ivory tower' around the tech we grew fond of.. they developed tech that is better cheaper, faster. This novelty presents the US with a dominance issue. Thus its better to focus on non-zero-sum climate change issues in diplomacy, while we pretend to have a technological edge in a niche technology that has reached its state-of-the-art. It's frustrating not to be on top. Our goal should be to get ahead... leap-frog... advance technology, but I make a distinction that doing good work doesn't require a technological edge. It requires an attitude of cooperation in the face of common threats to humanity. We cannot afford to be overly restrictive isolationists, especially now in the age of climate change.
One of the problems is US mis-jugdgement and/or misunderstanding of China, often inflamed by domestic US politics where China has become an all-purpose scapegoat for US domestic problems and poor policy outcomes of US policy. As a result, the quite offensive US policy changes since the Trump Administration have resulted in rash actions that have, in turn, resulted in over-reaction by Chinese. The moderate response by China can be attributed largely to resignation to the fact that there is little or no hope to improving the situation; this might be a reasonable response given current US domestic politics.
100% agree with you. China has been an all-purpose scapegoat for US domestic problems. Until recently, China does not react much. But as the rhetoric against China grows worse and extensive, the Chinese governments reacts. If the position is reserved, the reactions from US will be far worse. Hopefully there will be a president who really has the US people's interest at heart and fix the domestic problems such as drugs, guns, health care, homelessness, crime, infrastructures etc. By creating a safe and supportive environment for people to live, small businesses which employ 47.1% of the private workforce will grow.
Agree overall with your assessment, but I wonder what examples you could give as Chinese "over reaction"? I think China has actually under reacted so far.
For the lady who questioned previous cases, nI would direct her to the "Plaza Accord" the cut the legs off of the Japanese IC Industry when it surpassedbthe US on memory chips. China, ever the diligent student, look some lessons from that history. Edit: He did respondnwith the case of Japan, but not naming the "Plaza Accord".
Blame the French. The US originally opposed intervention but was pressured by G7, including Japan. Then industry lobbied Congress to push them in the direction of supporting a protectionist position, which they never passed. It gets so old seeing everyone in comments act like US is and always was the sole actor on the international stage - why did the accords adversely impact Japan more than say, Germany?? Maybe their own people, like Tomomitsu Oba, created their own protectionist policies that ultimately didn’t work out very well? You just say look at lessons from history like what you’re touting isn’t a conspiracy “It is true that the yen appreciated sharply against the dollar after the Plaza, more than did the European currenciesIt is also true that Japan's GDP has mostly stagnated since 1990, after decades of strong growth. But the timing is not quite right for the conspiracy theory. In between the 1985-86 appreciation of the yen and the Japanese recessions of the 1990s came the bubble years 1987- 89, when exchange rate policy was no longer working to push the yen up, but rather to support the dollar. A variant of the conspiracy theory is that Japanese purchases of dollars during the bubble years led to excessive money growth and thereby to the soaring prices of equities and real estate in Japan. The bursting of that bubble then led to the Japanese recession. But this is virtually the opposite of the theory that the Plaza did it: buying dollars is the opposite of selling dollars.”
MIT would be better representative of science and technology if they promoted Edison generators and dynamos power plants and vehicles instead of nuclear technology halogenated vinyl and halogenated carbon pollution..
It seems to me that China is already technologically advanced. I heard that China has been massively researching and developing semiconductors since the 1950s! And in the 90s China was the leader in lithography machines until they suddenly started importing cheaper lithography machines from other countries. Something doesn't compute with that scenario. More likely China is keeping a low profile and is downplaying their actual technological progress for manipulation reasons.
"Manipulation" OK, we understand the racist, xenophobic mentality that informs your viewpoint. Just a little feedback from a Chinese person used to dealing with this.
No nation can DIY EVERYTHING in the chip sector it’s just impossible Imagine space alien destroyed all nations except the USA Usa wont have high end chips so very very long time if at all
@@MontyGumby The greed of the American Imperialist creates their own opposition both at home and abroad. The workers having nothing in common with the capitalist bosses. .
The grand mistake was not realizing that the aggressive push for trade with China was fueled not by any strategic vision, long or short term, but rather by an all all out effort, in a quest for short term portfolio returns made on the backs of massive hoardes of slaves with no right to vote, to sell out and break the US labor market and movement once and for all. From the very start of that effort - which came into full swing in the 1990s after key back stage developments in the 70s and 80s, the disasterous consequences were foreseen, and - in the steady course of their fruition - have been loudly protested at each step of the descent, all to no noticeable effect on the lobbyist-lofted traitor class that rules the nation with an iron first.
It was a strategic decision to develop a rapprochement with China to contain the Soviet Union - Kissinger and Pillsbury played a large role in this. The effort in bringing China into the WTO also paid off when they bailed US out by purchasing a trillion's worth of its debt during the 2008 great financial crisis.
@@accountantthe3394 Great point about the bailout help... however, it was an ancillary, post-facto development, not a foreseen or motovating factor. 2 clarifications on Kissinger. If you look at the motivating actors and interests for the 1972 meeting, David Rockefeller, who in that time in particular was particularly powerful and more evil than at later times (he spearheaded the Allende coup just a year later), was the one who set the meeting up. His interests and agenda, though consistent, were perhaps more brazenly clear then than now. Also, we will recall that Nixon's posture towards China may have been a rideup on the Sino-Soviet split, but this period - and even through the Reagan deal - was NOT the principal period to which I refer, as there were still significant barriers to a good lot of outsourcing. Rather, it was Slick Willy and his goon squad that set the full ship in motion. The period to which I mostly refer is the one beginning in 1992 and sorta kinda maybe winding down in 2018.
@@netizencapet Right but it only shows that working with China isn't as bad as US has made out to be today. There was an avenue for genuine cooperation. Nevertheless, I agree it was unfettered capitalism that compelled US Ceos to offshore manufacturing to China since the 1990s. America had plenty to gain too considering profits from foreign cheap labour and access to a giant chinese market going into R&D departments gave rise to its tech and innovation superiority today.
@@accountantthe3394 Yes, “Made in USA” or decoupling wouldn’t mainly depend on China or it wouldn’t be decided by the “Chinaman”, neither American government. It is your Western capitalists, who are not willing to do so, unless you have strong willingness to drop your salary “voluntarily”. Congras, you had a very beautiful dream. Once you lost it, you couldn’t get it back again. That is the reality of the manufacture supply chains in the world. People’s “greediness” for the higher wage is totally contradicted by the greediness of your capitalism system and capitalists. Your dream couldn’t “come true” unless the most western capitalists are also political brainwashed and become naive or radicals.
@@profriday because you choose to believe the presumption of guilt, so even Chinese told you the truth, you believe it's not true or it's propaganda. I don't see any difference when Trump didn't pass the censorship of Twitter ... LoL
This is a very important analysis of the direction of American 🗽 policy toward technology trade with China 🇨🇳. It makes me sad to see these developments as I believe we are squandering a chance for peace in the world 🌏. 😢
Why the countries are taking such action ? Why it matters to all and In the end it’s one simple reason - living under a system out of fear. Even though most don’t like politics, I believe every vote matters. A system that can be checked is good. Unlike Authoritarian system (sometimes led with good intentions and helps the poor) but is still a system that is vulnerable (it good until the day someone bad takes the helm)
The working class always puts a check on the capitalist dreams of grandeur. World War two ended when the American Army in the Pacific demanded demobilization this gave the Chinese people the breathing space they needed to become an independent country and end 100 years of humiliation. .
When Bateman refers to the United States, he conflates the ruling US oligarchy with the interests of the American people. This identification has no basis in reality.
Likewise for the ruling CCP in China.
What I take away from Dr. Bateman's presentation is that the US policy towards China is driven by a sense of great panic, that the US foreign policy establishment doesn't really know how to respond to this challenge, and that the only thing that it has done with any sense of direction and self-confidence is to scream as loud as possible that no effort must be spared in slowing the rise of China. This situation looks like the Qing Dynasty's reaction to the rise of the West in the 19th century and the history may be repeating itself with the roles reversed this time around (unless the American people wake up and change the direction of the country -- Vote for RFK Jr. for President!).
Changed? No longer can be trusted.
@@psl7360 Vote RFK Jr. for President 2024! He is the last hope for America.
@@peterkoh1951 The Deep State won't let that happen.
The Qing Dynasty never worried about the rise of the West as China was self sufficient at that time. Contrary to the situation in the 19th century, China has no intention of conquering the West. If anything, it's the West which could not accept peaceful coexistence of a country as powerful as the West.
a republic can't solve our problems. we have a two party first past the post system. we need to find a minimum violence revolution. we need more direct democracy. we need to flatten the power curve. praying for benevolant dictators might seem like a good strategy for primitive societies, but it won't work for future socieites. we must have more direct democracy.
It is fair for me to be ahead but it becomes unfair for you to be ahead.
This is the new American definition of "fairness" and "level playing field"!
YES!! Kidding, sort of.
America is more like a third rate actor... No script, planning and vision.
32:14 the root cause of the whole situation, including reaching out to China to re-establish relationship during the Cold War, is the US’s insecurity.
Can you blame the US? Freedom is incredibly precious.
US is not on the Defense side, but on the blaming side. "It's all Chinese fault!" Any other countries, "you are either on US side or you are against."
CCP is not just a one party system, it's a religion. Try having this same discussion in Beijing! I think not
@@raymondrust9084, ur comment tell alot that most of american are uneducated and brainwashed.
You talk about China's belligerence as if the US itself is perfect. In addition, a lot of it are just safeguards against rising US hostility.
I am happy to see the US Navy stop patrolling the South China Sea.
If you want to win a competition, the more honorable way is to better yourself off, to gear up all your potentials. Instead US wants to drag its competitor down. Despicable.
Quote from Lenin "The capitalists will sell us the rope with which to hang them."
American are dumb, but not that dumb to commit suicide.
At the end of day usa is run by a bunch of humans not angels or saints
Whatever it takes to win I guess
Our competitor is bringing a gun to a knife fight.
@@stevedavenport1202 Stop playing the victim card. You can bring a cannon in response if you could.
GLORIOUS BRICS
Shhh, -Hide your strength, bide your time- 🫣
"United we stand, divided we fall" in BRICS+ motto...
BRICS is the league of third world countries.
The job of US multinationals is not about weighting their commerce activities with national security concerns. That is the job of the state. Their job is to grow and succeed.
They've been captured, corrupted. Can 🇺🇸 self de-corrupt without nuking the world? 😱
I think they are starting to have difficulties to compete with Chinese businesses, so they asked the government to help. Just like what happened in the 80s when they had problems competing with Japanese businesses.
@@joseph_wei In the 80s, Japanese businesses thrived on heavy state sponsorship and guidance. The same things happen today for Chinese giant businesses.
@@profriday It would not have mattered if that were true or not, they would have asked for helps from US government regardless.
@@joseph_wei Not true. American big tech companies made BIG bucks with China, and they suffer a great loss from trade war initiated by US government. Uncle Sam's primary concern with China is strictly about geopolitics than economics.
At the end of the day it is American look down on Chinese that Chinese cannot innovate and invent but forgetting who founded nVidia, TSMC and who is at the helm of AMD.
Both nVidia and AMD are American companies.
The founder of TSMC (Morris Chang) is a Chinese American.
@@profriday Morris Chang, Jensen Huang and Lisa Su are all Chinese. Their race cannot change. If the US and China continue to co-operate, there could be more Sino-American innovations beyond Nvidia, TSMC and AMD.
@@westhypocrisy Nonesense. US does not suffer from brain drain while China does. The success of these Chinese American is not due to their ethnicity but their nationality.
@@westhypocrisy BTW, all of them were originated from ROC, not PRC.
@@profriday I beg your pardon. Morris Chang was born in Ningbo, and Ningbo is not in ROC. I am sure Lisa's and Jensen's parents were born in China too. Whether ROC or PRC, they are Chinese.
You should talk about America, not China. Do you have any idea what is going on in this country? Leave China alone! They are just our vendors...you want something and get it online from China. Find a solution for America's poverty!
Hes mostly talking about America and its foreign policy.
We all know and don't want to talk about it is that it was the Chinese students, first from Taiwan in the mid 60's to the Chinese students after Nixon's visit, those students and the ones that stayed to work took the US digital tech to the top. The recent two presidents thought they could replace these Chinese with Indians. Wishful thinking, the Indian does not have the smarts or imagination to take or keep the US digital industry up at the top. why the panic mode.
Just a clarification: the organization rendered in the transcript as sypheus or cepheus is actually CFIUS, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, q.v.
What is crystal clear is US doesn’t know how to deal with such strong capable competitor. You already admitted that the result will be the same long term anyway. Instead of coming up with childish obstacles, US should start learning how Chinese thinks, its cultural and motivation. The fact that politicians think it’s a zero sum game proves that it’s doubling down on an inevitable you don’t like. Not very smart.
What should Americ do? Learn what?
@@JameBlack The American Imperialist are interested in profits and ownership only.
All countries have a firewall. These firewalls are the g4 boundaries. It is not solely a Chinese boundary but the boundariy you see is the g4 boundary.
There is absolutely ZERO difference between Chinese civilian and military like there is in the West. It is hard for us to understand, China is a unified leadership structure. Generals and party officials alike have private business enterprises, and there is no question that business exists to support the state and the party's objectives.
The workers have forced the capitalist to back off from requiring a security clearance to work in an Ice Cream plant. The second witch hunt was begun by FDR before the second Imperialist slaughter of World War 2. "Socialism on Trial" documents the actual courtroom testimony. Socialist Workers Party vs Attorney General put the FBI on trial.
Generals are not allowed to have private businesses in China. I also disagree that businesses exist to support party objectives. State owned businesses maybe, but not private businesses, which are just like private businesses in the US, exist for profit making.
The problem is the US considers development of any other countries is a threat. Development is a zero sum game vis a vis US.
Oh really? Remember the sanction response to Japan. Oh wait… ASML is a Dutch company, did the US sanction the Dutch? Get real. So many examples from the 20th century that refute your ridiculous conclusion.
Might makes right . Successful Communist China and Russia now have enough might to be right. Might makes rules. Successful Communist China and Russia now have enough might to make rules. Might enables sanctions to be imposed. Successful Communist China and Russia now have enough might to impose sanctions. Meritocracy is the future.
Talking about semiconductor, it is not a good decision!
1. American companies need to sale their products to china to make money to finance future product development.
2. When china can't get such product, china will go a the way to find alternative solutions or develop their own. Look at space technology, gps and ev.
@38:06 you could successfully argue that soybeans are FAR more of a strategic resource than semiconductors. The Chinese understand that a lot more than Westerners. Limit FOOD exports, and they will sense a war of necessity, and Western containment will be perceived as Chinese encirclement.
Capitalism therefore has starvation as the price of admission. That's what you always do to those with little to no faith in the system. It may be good policy for capitalist famers but it bad policy for small farmers who would be devastated. Worldwide its workers and small farmers against the big bosses of agribusiness and industry.
@@kimobrien. you forget, though, capitalism is a NECCISSARY evolution and experience shows it cannot be successfully skipped or rushed. Violent transitions do far more harm than good. Modern Danish democratic socialism is about as far as humanity has progressed on it's own without violence, and the living standard for ordinary workers is very high, and career progression and employment mobility is also very good. I will assume that your heart is in the right place, rushing the evolution of human economic and financial development is a recipe for disaster. Socialism is realistically a 1000 year project. Unsatisfying, I know.
@@earth9531 Ya well you seem to have forgotten the years Denmark spent under Hitler. In 1913 Lenin wrote Imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism and that is as true today as it was in 1913. The problem back then is the same as today a Social Democratic leadership unwill to lead any class struggle out of fear of loss of a few privileges. Stalinism didn't represent a revolutionary course but a class collaborationist one were it joined with the Social Democrat leaders and liberals in Popular Fronts Against Fascism that paved the way for fascist victories throughout Europe. You can see that workers in Europe are already ahead of their leaders in France and the UK. Social Democratic traitors like Ebert of Germany have not been forgotten. Social Democratic Bourgeois Democracy can not halt fascism ot another world war only world Socialist Revolution can.
@@earth9531 Defending the US Imperialist in a trade dispute with Capatlism with Chinese Characteristics involving food shows just how utterly rotten and despicable Danish Social Democracy is.
awesome
I think the world is moving in a new direction including China.
moving in a new direction...off the bloody cliff !
The president Ronald Reagan Admin wanted to bring China up to modern technology. So that they could launch satellite system for SDI system and the global Internet. They have been building and launching sattelites for 40 years. They are very good at what they have been employed to do for the US military. Recently China landed on the dark side of the moon which is a difficult area to land and explore. The first country to land a Rover on the dark side of the moon.
But again fell into the usual narrative that China "learned " from USA. USA had never had the ability to land on the dark side of the moon because that needed to place a communications satellite in a "Halo " orbit at the pole of the moon. USA does not have the technology and it is a Chinese innovation.
We have a department of commerce that has a better idea of the economic conditions and global trade does need equalization consideration for all concerned.
neocons couldnt tie their on shoes without a guy from MIT helping them. Thats why Neocons prefer to sit so their shoes dont fall off. They shuffle when they walk. Now there are shoes made for Neocons and geriatrics which have no laces so I expect the Neocons will be ordering the shiny black ones that look like dress shoes.
Check conclusion chapter. Geopolitical globalism was and is beneficial for all countries. It wil be next to impossible to re-new production of IT hardware or radio-electronics in USA. The labour was retrenched and retraining would be hard. And most of all, yanks hate manufacturing jobs.
@33:09 we are doing the exact same thing with export controls to China that we did with export controls to Japan in the 1930s, expect similar results
So you mean China is about to invade most Asian-Pacific countries and slaughter 10s of millions of people in those countries, including massacre the whole cities of the invaded countries? Because that's what Japan did 1930s-1945.
mercantilism 2.0 - great power politics veiled under resource/technology communal mercantilism.
New term on the block: multipolarity 👀
@@RaymondLi604 Yes, hopefully civil and more equitable for all.
@@michaelf5410 Sorry, “Made in USA” or decoupling wouldn’t mainly depend on China or it wouldn’t be decided by the “Chinaman”, neither American government. It is your Western capitalists, who are not willing to do so, unless you have strong willingness to drop your salary “voluntarily”. Congras, you had a very beautiful dream. Once you lost it, you couldn’t get it back again. That is the reality of the manufacture supply chains in the world. People’s “greediness” for the higher wage is totally contradicted by the greediness of your capitalism system and capitalists. Your dream couldn’t “come true” unless the most western capitalists are also political brainwashed and become naive or radicals.
To enlarge the point; Brazil & Argentina are currently industrially testing a new strain of wheat. If it proves its worth it changes global power dynamics unseen since the beginning of industrialisation. This supposed rivalry becomes irrelevant. So, I'll stick with my mercantilism 2.0.
Techno Nationalism.
Why only China? (Glad the question was asked). I would HOPE the USA would develop guard rails to secure the appropriate (strategic) technologies concerns & fears beyond today's adversaries. Tomorrow it could be some other set of countries. We really need to have a more broader and clearer Grand Strat. on this topic.
Very insightful. Highly relevant.
US grand strategy should be how to improve itself and not containing others. Yesterday was Japan, today is China, tomorrow could be India. Even if you lost number one, you could catch up and win again if you concentrate on improving yourself. In decline and hope others won't catch up with you is not the most effective.
It's really naive to believe that only the US could control certain technologies. Fundamentally technologies are based on science and the principal of science is public knowledge, so China or other countries would catch up with the leader sooner or later.
It is call export control domestically and wassenaar arrangement internationally.
The 🇺🇸 smarties know, but not in control. See Jeffrey Sachs 👀
@@hyuxion inother word "Cant compete then sanction"
No one will die for usa anymore
Being in a real university environment is truly wonderful. The US Export Control framework is so broad that telephone calls and other transmissions out of the US implicates this law.
You are telling a lot of lies you may not realise.
it is good that China and US is decoupling, China can just copy and sell them at a cheap price, no need for IP
42:18
Too many nonsense, baseless accusations👎👎👎👎
This guy thinks that the US will be around in 40 years hahahahahahahahahahahahaha
I like his analysis, it identifies different postures and has the potential to sort people out towards a common strategic goal.
美国可以更伟大的，如果这个会议是在国会进行/讨论的话。
不幸的是，这种情况不可能发生。
@@unreliablenarrator6649 会发生的，需要一些时间
🤣🤣🤣👍🇧🇷🇷🇺🇮🇳🇨🇳🇿🇦➕️👍😁😁😁
😁🇨🇳 De-risking from 🇺🇲 because of 🇺🇲 politics ✌️😁
When American and most other foreign companies obey intellectual property(IP) laws, but Chinese firms do not- it doesn't just equalize Chinese firms with the IP holder, it catapults them into first. The hierarchy of advantages favor the thieves then the originators and everyone else at the bottom of the heap. This is unsustainable and why the business realm is increasingly waking up even if the political class are ahead of them in realizing the need for change in the relationship.
IP enforcement is just rent seeking activity and imposition of artificial scarcity. Unlike commodities, finished goods, etc. "IP" can be distributed limitlessly. So why isnt it?
@@nathanderks5486 According to the US Constitutional theory IP is suppose to encourage the flourishing of the arts and sciences not be a source of billions in profits for owners.
It takes a lot of effort and ingenuity to invent something that people need and/or want in large amounts and that can be profitably made. It takes much less effort to steal that labor.
@@KhaavrenKat Don't you want to tell us the story about how "Bill Gates and Microsoft invented the internet and computer." ?
Great talk! Very insightful!
👎👎👎👎👎
It’s ok buddy - u can say it - the US is being the Tanya Harding of competition as always
👍👍👍😃😃😃👏👏👏
Awesome. The USA cannot compete fairly.
China never believes in fair competition, nor does China practice it.
BRICS
MAKE FRIENDS AND PARTNERS.
STOP TRYING TO DICTATE HOW OTHER COUNTRIES AND PEOPLE'S LIVE AND THINK.
A fine piece of western propaganda. Nice❤
Well, someone still needs to scoop the 💩 after the 🐎 have long bolted to the Global Rest 😝
It proof, Henry Kissinger Quote: “To be an enemy of America can be dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal.” is right.
@@chriswong9158 Better for China to go back to Mao's era, huh?
@@profriday China is headed for what Leon Trotsky called a political revolution.
When he was mentioning the suddenly stoping a bicycle scenario, honestly, a picture of Biden felt off the bike in my mind. 😅
Haha, check out the number of Asians around the table in the zoomed out shot 🙃
Only take one to shake the table, two and they feel invaded.
The cause of the rise in increasing authoritarianism in China
is internal instability and it may be occurring in the States as well.
This instability may have many historical causes but the most
important cause to consider, to focus on, I think, is climate-change.
Nature's 'campaign' will eventually convince more people its real, if
it has not already. And governments should know its real by studying
simple trends.
There is nothing that threatens the sovereignty of all nations more
then the alien weather threats of nature...we need to understand
and predict these threats, and organize ourselves geopolitically
around the issue of climate change.
I urge the Department of defense to cooperate on the
issue of climate change, and for the Chinese Imperial
Academy of Sciences to specifically cooperate with NASA
on the scientific understanding of climate change.
Just as a starting point.
Geopolitically we need to develop a synergistic, non-zero-sum
security pact similar to a security-arms pact that guarantees
security for affected sovereigns and designates foreign help
from countries less affected by climate change...and if we do
this correctly we should be able get cooperation back to
the way things were in terms of openness between China and US.
We need to learn to accept responsibility for historical grievances
by going forward reliably in honest dedicated relationships
that are committed to protecting sovereigns, in exchange for being
protected by them... unless America thinks it will never be in a
a situation where it needs foreign aid, even as the debt ceiling is
squeezing our heads in the face of de-dollarization.
When I consider Tech Giganticism, I understand why it's important to
have an edge so that we can continue to dominate and be a force for
good in the world, but even as we dominated it was never clear to
me that we were actually doing good work. Perhaps it was self-analysis
using the products of Tech Giants that made us see this...
Now considering China is doing new work technologically that seems to
circumnavigate the need for semiconductors...while we develop an 'ivory
tower' around the tech we grew fond of.. they developed tech that is better
cheaper, faster. This novelty presents the US with a dominance issue. Thus its
better to focus on non-zero-sum climate change issues in diplomacy, while
we pretend to have a technological edge in a niche technology that has
reached its state-of-the-art.
It's frustrating not to be on top. Our goal should be to get ahead...
leap-frog... advance technology, but I make a distinction that doing
good work doesn't require a technological edge. It requires an attitude
of cooperation in the face of common threats to humanity. We cannot
afford to be overly restrictive isolationists, especially now in the
age of climate change.
One of the problems is US mis-jugdgement and/or misunderstanding of China, often inflamed by domestic US politics where China has become an all-purpose scapegoat for US domestic problems and poor policy outcomes of US policy. As a result, the quite offensive US policy changes since the Trump Administration have resulted in rash actions that have, in turn, resulted in over-reaction by Chinese. The moderate response by China can be attributed largely to resignation to the fact that there is little or no hope to improving the situation; this might be a reasonable response given current US domestic politics.
100% agree with you. China has been an all-purpose scapegoat for US domestic problems. Until recently, China does not react much. But as the rhetoric against China grows worse and extensive, the Chinese governments reacts. If the position is reserved, the reactions from US will be far worse.
Hopefully there will be a president who really has the US people's interest at heart and fix the domestic problems such as drugs, guns, health care, homelessness, crime, infrastructures etc. By creating a safe and supportive environment for people to live, small businesses which employ 47.1% of the private workforce will grow.
@@msy72112 Capitalism can not be fixed. World capitalism and its chief player US Imperialism is in decline.
Agree overall with your assessment, but I wonder what examples you could give as Chinese "over reaction"? I think China has actually under reacted so far.
For the lady who questioned previous cases, nI would direct her to the "Plaza Accord" the cut the legs off of the Japanese IC Industry when it surpassedbthe US on memory chips. China, ever the diligent student, look some lessons from that history. Edit: He did respondnwith the case of Japan, but not naming the "Plaza Accord".
Blame the French. The US originally opposed intervention but was pressured by G7, including Japan. Then industry lobbied Congress to push them in the direction of supporting a protectionist position, which they never passed. It gets so old seeing everyone in comments act like US is and always was the sole actor on the international stage - why did the accords adversely impact Japan more than say, Germany?? Maybe their own people, like Tomomitsu Oba, created their own protectionist policies that ultimately didn’t work out very well? You just say look at lessons from history like what you’re touting isn’t a conspiracy
“It is true that the yen appreciated sharply against the dollar after the Plaza, more than did the European currenciesIt is also true that Japan's GDP has mostly stagnated since 1990, after decades of strong growth. But the timing is not quite right for the conspiracy theory. In between the 1985-86 appreciation of the yen and the Japanese recessions of the 1990s came the bubble years 1987- 89, when exchange rate policy was no longer working to push the yen up, but rather to support the dollar. A variant of the conspiracy theory is that Japanese purchases of dollars during the bubble years led to excessive money growth and thereby to the soaring prices of equities and real estate in Japan. The bursting of that bubble then led to the Japanese recession. But this is virtually the opposite of the theory that the Plaza did it: buying dollars is the opposite of selling dollars.”
Stupid talk. Hallucination. When facing an absolute strength, all these tricks are all laughable.
MIT would be better representative of science and technology if they promoted Edison generators and dynamos power plants and vehicles instead of nuclear technology halogenated vinyl and halogenated carbon pollution..
似是而非！
It short it's all about deception and hypocrite
They sure talk a lot, don't they? The bottom line is people. How many do they have on their side(s)? 📉
yes. the U.S. can not accept the fact that one day Chinese people have the same living standard as them. that will be a disaster for the U.S.
It seems to me that China is already technologically advanced. I heard that China has been massively researching and developing semiconductors since the 1950s! And in the 90s China was the leader in lithography machines until they suddenly started importing cheaper lithography machines from other countries. Something doesn't compute with that scenario. More likely China is keeping a low profile and is downplaying their actual technological progress for manipulation reasons.
"Manipulation" OK, we understand the racist, xenophobic mentality that informs your viewpoint. Just a little feedback from a Chinese person used to dealing with this.
No nation can DIY EVERYTHING in the chip sector it’s just impossible
Imagine space alien destroyed all nations except the USA
Usa wont have high end chips so very very long time if at all
@@unreliablenarrator6649You sound ten years old.
@@unreliablenarrator6649Which country’s government mowed down protesters en masse?
Mexico should have been our preferred area of manufacturing and capital concentration. It solves both the migration and near-shoring our supply chain.
That lowers the wall against people that US would like to exclude
It isn't that the US hasn't tried. If it had worked, Americans wouldn't go across Pacific.
No way Mexico can SCALE like China (and you can forget about efficiency, and laptops priced like we have since 2000)
@@MontyGumby The greed of the American Imperialist creates their own opposition both at home and abroad. The workers having nothing in common with the capitalist bosses. .
We shouldn't have outsourced to begin with.... or maybe only about 1/2 as much.
Lol, are these all bots in the comments critisizing this rather balanced speech?
The grand mistake was not realizing that the aggressive push for trade with China was fueled not by any strategic vision, long or short term, but rather by an all all out effort, in a quest for short term portfolio returns made on the backs of massive hoardes of slaves with no right to vote, to sell out and break the US labor market and movement once and for all. From the very start of that effort - which came into full swing in the 1990s after key back stage developments in the 70s and 80s, the disasterous consequences were foreseen, and - in the steady course of their fruition - have been loudly protested at each step of the descent, all to no noticeable effect on the lobbyist-lofted traitor class that rules the nation with an iron first.
It was a strategic decision to develop a rapprochement with China to contain the Soviet Union - Kissinger and Pillsbury played a large role in this. The effort in bringing China into the WTO also paid off when they bailed US out by purchasing a trillion's worth of its debt during the 2008 great financial crisis.
@@accountantthe3394 Great point about the bailout help... however, it was an ancillary, post-facto development, not a foreseen or motovating factor. 2 clarifications on Kissinger. If you look at the motivating actors and interests for the 1972 meeting, David Rockefeller, who in that time in particular was particularly powerful and more evil than at later times (he spearheaded the Allende coup just a year later), was the one who set the meeting up. His interests and agenda, though consistent, were perhaps more brazenly clear then than now. Also, we will recall that Nixon's posture towards China may have been a rideup on the Sino-Soviet split, but this period - and even through the Reagan deal - was NOT the principal period to which I refer, as there were still significant barriers to a good lot of outsourcing. Rather, it was Slick Willy and his goon squad that set the full ship in motion. The period to which I mostly refer is the one beginning in 1992 and sorta kinda maybe winding down in 2018.
@@netizencapet Right but it only shows that working with China isn't as bad as US has made out to be today. There was an avenue for genuine cooperation. Nevertheless, I agree it was unfettered capitalism that compelled US Ceos to offshore manufacturing to China since the 1990s. America had plenty to gain too considering profits from foreign cheap labour and access to a giant chinese market going into R&D departments gave rise to its tech and innovation superiority today.
@@accountantthe3394 Yes, “Made in USA” or decoupling wouldn’t mainly depend on China or it wouldn’t be decided by the “Chinaman”, neither American government. It is your Western capitalists, who are not willing to do so, unless you have strong willingness to drop your salary “voluntarily”. Congras, you had a very beautiful dream. Once you lost it, you couldn’t get it back again. That is the reality of the manufacture supply chains in the world. People’s “greediness” for the higher wage is totally contradicted by the greediness of your capitalism system and capitalists. Your dream couldn’t “come true” unless the most western capitalists are also political brainwashed and become naive or radicals.
@@accountantthe3394 You might enjoy reading "Beijing's Global Media Offensive" by Joshua Kurlantzick.
Has Bateman been to XingJiang?
Can China allow foreigners travelling freely in XingJiang?
@@profriday can foreigners truly and honestly report what they see in Xinjiang when they go back?
@@patrick_lee A state of heavy censorship (China) does not allow truly and honestly reporting.
@@profriday because you choose to believe the presumption of guilt, so even Chinese told you the truth, you believe it's not true or it's propaganda. I don't see any difference when Trump didn't pass the censorship of Twitter ... LoL
@@patrick_lee Trump does envy the privileges of those dictactors like Xi jinping, Kim Jong-Un and Putin.
This is a very important analysis of the direction of American 🗽 policy toward technology trade with China 🇨🇳. It makes me sad to see these developments as I believe we are squandering a chance for peace in the world 🌏. 😢
What would you have done differently?
Why the countries are taking such action ? Why it matters to all and In the end it’s one simple reason - living under a system out of fear. Even though most don’t like politics, I believe every vote matters. A system that can be checked is good. Unlike Authoritarian system (sometimes led with good intentions and helps the poor) but is still a system that is vulnerable (it good until the day someone bad takes the helm)
The working class always puts a check on the capitalist dreams of grandeur. World War two ended when the American Army in the Pacific demanded demobilization this gave the Chinese people the breathing space they needed to become an independent country and end 100 years of humiliation. .
All these insights from the U.S. think tanks land on deaf ears in Washinton DC, the focus should be on follow-the-money