Jump to content

Welcome to FutureTimeline.forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!

These ads will disappear if you register on the forum

Photo

The Collapse of the United States

United States America Future of United States China Russia Cold War 1970s 9/11 Superpower Pearl Harbor

  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

#21
Maximus

Maximus

    Spaceman

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,728 posts
  • LocationCanada

When i said "why pick Vietnam", i meant "why pick Vietnam as an example to try and refute my comment", not "why would China pick on Vietnam". I thought that was pretty obvious.

 

To restate what i clearly said in my original comment: Where China has historically interfered with other nations, it has usually been with their near neighbours, so the fact that the Vietnamese might prefer a US dominated world to one with 2 superpowers is pretty irrelevant to the point i was making.

 

(Which is that most of the world that is not allied to the USA would probably breathe a little easier with some stronger checks on US power. And might have reason to expect china to be more restrained in their messing with other peoples' countries half way round the world)

 

Obviously Vietnam would not be included in this, because of their close proximity and history of war with China.

 

If anyone has any evidence or historic examples of china operating far from their own borders, building military bases or indulging in the sort of interventionism, destabilization or regime change that the USA has been performing all over the world since WW2 please bring them up. I've already acknowledged that people who live right next to china are unlikely to welcome China's ascent to global superpower status. 

 

EDIT: The reason i think the USA is more of a military threat to the rest of the world (Aside from it's own allies) than China, is the USA's very powerful and influential military industrial complex, which means that whenever the USA stops bombing people, powerful forces will start pressuring the govt. to find a new target ASAP.

 

My bad, I should've read your original comment more carefully. 

 

However, you still seem to believe in this idea of "Chinese exceptionalism" (maybe not the best word for it), the idea that China's rise is purely economic in nature, and that China will not use its newfound power to pursue its interests around the world, as every great power in modern history has done. When you argue that China has been a "superpower" in the past but never attacked anyone outside its region, the answer to this is obvious: it did not have global interests because it did not have the ability to project power or influence beyond its immediate region. I mean, it's hard to project power when your fastest mode of transportation takes half a year to reach nations outside your region. You can simply forget about maintaining supply lines when those time frames are involved.

 

You simply can't compare modern China to ancient China, for the same reason that comparisons of the US' supposed collapse with that of the Roman Empire are mostly inaccurate. The advent of modern technology has profoundly altered the realm of geopolitics; great powers are no longer limited to their immediate regions. They now have the ability to project power around the world. So yes, China hasn't engaged in global power projection in the past (although I recommend you read up on their activities in the Indian Ocean and Africa), but only because it never had the ability to do so. I mean, they only recently (in the past decade or two) emerged from absolute poverty. As I outlined in my previous paragraph, we're already seeing China turning its economic power into diplomatic and military power. This will only continue, and we will see China rise to directly challenge US interests around the world. We're already seeing this in the SCS, but you could argue that's China's immediate region, so it doesn't count.



#22
kjaggard

kjaggard

    Artificer

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,900 posts
  • Locationwhere fanciful imaginings and hard won knowledge meet to genesis the future.

To say that the US went through the civil war, the great depression and the world wars, only to come out stronger ... is a gross oversimplification.

 

The world wars happened in places other than the Americas, and the burden fell most heavily on those other regions. Death tolls, property damage, loss of infrastructure, destroyed economies, every inch of collateral damage was overseas and effected the lives of militaries and civilians for years afterwards. A grade school teacher in France knew the consequences and felt the effects of the wars long after they were Won.

 

The US was literally past the edge of the Blast Radius and so they didn't so much rise because of the war as much as everybody else was knocked over and Being still on their feet the US was able to take advantage of opportunities others simply couldn't.

 

The civil war and the revolutionary wars in the US actually had heavy investment from outside sources that resulted in countries going bankrupt and having their own revolutions. It also disrupted world trade and harvesting of goods that were exported. They happened around the industrial revolution which changed how things were done on a fundamental level anyway.

 

Basically in all these instances the US didn't emerge stronger, the rest of the world was just punch drunk from massive shifts on a global scale.

 

A more accurate model of the plight of the US is to look at The British Empire of old and it's folding in. Or France, or the Dutch or Portugese trading empires. The fall of rome, Babylon.

 

There used to be a great essay on the Fall of empires that I can't seem to find the link to. A lot of the hallmarks are there, and this time the US is actively pulling away from the aspects that let them adapt and we are not only no longer outside the blast radius, we are the bullseye. We are the biggest Target, we will take the most damage, and certain political and social mindsets are regressive and calcified.


Live content within small means. Seek elegance rather than luxury, Grace over fashion and wealth over riches.
Listen to clouds and mountains, children and sages. Act bravely, think boldly.
Await occasions, never make haste. Find wonder and awe, by experiencing the everyday.

#23
tierbook

tierbook

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,243 posts
  • LocationCharleston sc

You guys are aware that China and Vietnam have been at war more recently than the US and Vietnam right? The intensity of the conflict was probably a bit higher though it only lasted a few months. I think China lost 30k vs 15k for Vietnam?



#24
Alislaws

Alislaws

    Democratic Socialist Materialist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,453 posts
  • LocationLondon

Just to clarify: I don't think china will be significantly more ethical than the USA has been in their international dealings, but i do think that China and the USA as the worlds two superpowers, will each need to tread more carefully than the USA has had to.

 

And i still really think the pressure from the massive military supply and support corporations in the USA is one of the few ways to rationally explain why they keep starting these wars which cost the country hundreds of billions of $ and thousands of human lives, and cost politicians support and popularity (in the long term), and often fail to achieve their initial goals. Then they go and do it again.

 

To some extent it is just that we know the USA cant seem to stop bombing people and sure china might well be worse, but they also might be happier to dominate the world through economics, trade, and technology without the same constant internal pressure to keep dropping million $ bombs on people in order to keep the gravy train going. 

 

If things progressed into a cold war situation then i think we could see more conflict around the world rather than less, but we don't have the same ideological issues that underpinned the USA/Russia cold war, so this could be avoided.

 

Yeah we know about the whole China/Vietnam conflict, which is why it was picked as an example of Chinese aggression. 



#25
LWFlouisa

LWFlouisa

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 97 posts
  • LocationNashChat

I'm actually more intrigued by the idea of, if the US does collapse (I'll be moving towards living in Canada anyway), is whether--like how Latin in Ancient Rome later went on to birth the Latin Languages, whether there will be an eventual split of the American English languages, beyond merely their dialects. We already have people using words differently from each across different "States".

 

As you might tell, I'm not of the mindset that more languages == harmful. It takes brain power to learn a language. And people that propose a universal language created--don't have it.


Cerebrum Cerebellum -- Speculative Non-Fiction -- Writing

Luna Network -- Nodal Sneaker Network -- Programming

Published Works: https://www.wattpad.com/432077022-tevun-krus-44-sword-planet-the-intergalactic-heads


#26
Yuli Ban

Yuli Ban

    Born Again Singularitarian

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,322 posts
  • LocationNew Orleans, LA

I'm afraid that the days of branching active languages is at an end*. Even if the US falls a la Rome, we won't use twenty different variants of English and post-English. It'll still be the same language. The cold fact is that cultural fluidity began solidifying in the 1700s and 1800s with the beginning of mass media, and it kicked into overdrive with the development of telephones, television, and internet. Languages formed because of insularization. People didn't commonly speak to folk from different regions beyond occasional trade, hence why cultures formed. It's no coincidence that some entirely separate and unique languages were found on the opposite sides of otherwise impassable mountain ranges in places that would, today, consist of the same nation or even the same state. 

Cultural universalism is a new concept. It's utterly unprecedented in the history of life on Earth that an organism on one side of the planet can instantly converse with an organism on the other side. 

 

Despite how boring it sounds, it simply isn't efficient for there to be new languages developing when humans now more than ever need to be able to talk to one another. The language barrier is one of the largest things keeping "true" globalism from arising, hence why so much time and money is spent on natural-language AI. The concept of a universal language is intelligent and requires brain-power— brain-power focused on this age of civilization rather than an age of tribes. 

 

Passive languages that aren't meant to replace common vernacular and serve more as a hobby or to enhance entertainment (e.g. ithkuil, esperanto, elvish languages, new-Latin, etc.) need not apply.

 

*Provided civilization is not abruptly destroyed via nuclear war, asteroid impact, etc. and digital architecture remains in place or can be easily reconstructed


And remember my friend, future events such as these will affect you in the future.


#27
Alislaws

Alislaws

    Democratic Socialist Materialist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,453 posts
  • LocationLondon

i'd say probably within a decade we will have good enough real-time automatic translation that language barriers will not be a thing. 

 

might be being too optimistic, i dunno.



#28
TheComrade

TheComrade

    BANNED

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,642 posts

I'm actually more intrigued by the idea of, if the US does collapse (I'll be moving towards living in Canada anyway)

 

If the US does collapse, Canada will not be a safe place anymore.



#29
Yuli Ban

Yuli Ban

    Born Again Singularitarian

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,322 posts
  • LocationNew Orleans, LA

 

I'm actually more intrigued by the idea of, if the US does collapse (I'll be moving towards living in Canada anyway)

 

If the US does collapse, Canada will not be a safe place anymore.

 

I dunno, Canada's pretty big. It's kinda like saying if the Middle East collapses, I'll be moving towards anywhere from Kazakhstan to Siberia.


And remember my friend, future events such as these will affect you in the future.


#30
Maximus

Maximus

    Spaceman

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,728 posts
  • LocationCanada

 

 

I'm actually more intrigued by the idea of, if the US does collapse (I'll be moving towards living in Canada anyway)

 

If the US does collapse, Canada will not be a safe place anymore.

 

I dunno, Canada's pretty big. It's kinda like saying if the Middle East collapses, I'll be moving towards anywhere from Kazakhstan to Siberia.

 

 

Canada, as in populated Canada, which is overwhelmingly a thin strip along the US border. Sure, we have a shit ton of frozen land up north, but until climate change does its thing, that's off-limits. 



#31
LWFlouisa

LWFlouisa

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 97 posts
  • LocationNashChat

Hmmm, I'm still not sure of universalism is inevitable though. Without a nuclear war? Definitely? But nuclear war tends to isolate people for decades. It seems like anything could go, and the future is largely unpredictable.

 

(It's one of the reasons I stick to writing no more than five years in the future.)


Cerebrum Cerebellum -- Speculative Non-Fiction -- Writing

Luna Network -- Nodal Sneaker Network -- Programming

Published Works: https://www.wattpad.com/432077022-tevun-krus-44-sword-planet-the-intergalactic-heads


#32
Sciencerocks

Sciencerocks

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,143 posts

America for the past 45 years has been collapsing..Consider this:

1. Educational system has want from one of the best on earth to now being 22nd in math and science. There's entire areas of are country that is like a second world country in education.

2. Healthcare 35th in the world. We're the only major developed country on earth that doesn't have single payer...And guess what! All those single payer countries are eating our lunch! Our baby death rate is one of the highest in the developed world too....Yet, we spend more then all those 34 other nations by double.

3. Our infrastructure is second world....Some areas third world.

 

You see, we spend a shit ton on our military but we're not ALLOWED to improve our own fucking country. Why? Because of republicans and Liberterians. They're cutting our throat.


  • LWFlouisa likes this

#33
TheComrade

TheComrade

    BANNED

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,642 posts

You see, we spend a shit ton on our military but we're not ALLOWED to improve our own fucking country. Why?

 

Because USA is global empire, whose well being depends of military more than of good education and healthcare.


  • As We Rise likes this

#34
Mike the average

Mike the average

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,509 posts
Libertarians like Ron Paul had some logic, he wanted to end US military occupations of other countries around the world. Occupations that deliberately destabilise middle eastern oil countries and provoke economic rivals like China.

He also made clear that all these military interventions are creating more enemies and producing more terrorists for the future.

Unfortunately US republican thinktanks love islamic terrorism. You could also include many democrats. However I think Hilary was just an idiot rather than looking to manipulate the oil industry. It gives them the opportunity to continue military intervention under the reason of counter-terrorism.

Trump buddying up and doing curtsies with Saudi Arabia is another example of his, the home of islamic extremism. Just as calling Qatar a sponsor of terrorism and selling thirty six F15s to them a week later is.

US politicians dont mind the terrorist act at home as long as its not anywhere near them. If you instill hate amongst the public, the terrorists are dumb enough to attack the masses rather than the real cause.

Ron Paul during the republican debates proved he was the only candidate who was in fact not retarded. All media (left, right) began a shutout campaign against him.
'Force always attracts men of low morality' - Einstein
'Great spirits always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds' - Einstein

#35
LWFlouisa

LWFlouisa

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 97 posts
  • LocationNashChat

America for the past 45 years has been collapsing..Consider this:

1. Educational system has want from one of the best on earth to now being 22nd in math and science. There's entire areas of are country that is like a second world country in education.

2. Healthcare 35th in the world. We're the only major developed country on earth that doesn't have single payer...And guess what! All those single payer countries are eating our lunch! Our baby death rate is one of the highest in the developed world too....Yet, we spend more then all those 34 other nations by double.

3. Our infrastructure is second world....Some areas third world.

 

You see, we spend a shit ton on our military but we're not ALLOWED to improve our own fucking country. Why? Because of republicans and Liberterians. They're cutting our throat.

 

Which kind of libertarians? Desole, not trying to be snarky. I'm honestly curious.

 

(I've been of the Noam Chomsky Bernie Sander camp for a while.)

 

I assume the fake libertarians called the Tea Party? (Anarcho Capitalists, insead of Anarcho Socialist.)

 

Tea party I find kind of embarrassingly right wing. Killing the United States.

 

I think the American alliance with Britain, and Britain wanting to kill encryption (good luck with that) is definitely a sign of some kind of collapse.


  • Sciencerocks likes this

Cerebrum Cerebellum -- Speculative Non-Fiction -- Writing

Luna Network -- Nodal Sneaker Network -- Programming

Published Works: https://www.wattpad.com/432077022-tevun-krus-44-sword-planet-the-intergalactic-heads


#36
Sciencerocks

Sciencerocks

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,143 posts

 

America for the past 45 years has been collapsing..Consider this:

1. Educational system has want from one of the best on earth to now being 22nd in math and science. There's entire areas of are country that is like a second world country in education.

2. Healthcare 35th in the world. We're the only major developed country on earth that doesn't have single payer...And guess what! All those single payer countries are eating our lunch! Our baby death rate is one of the highest in the developed world too....Yet, we spend more then all those 34 other nations by double.

3. Our infrastructure is second world....Some areas third world.

 

You see, we spend a shit ton on our military but we're not ALLOWED to improve our own fucking country. Why? Because of republicans and Liberterians. They're cutting our throat.

 

Which kind of libertarians? Desole, not trying to be snarky. I'm honestly curious.

 

(I've been of the Noam Chomsky Bernie Sander camp for a while.)

 

I assume the fake libertarians called the Tea Party? (Anarcho Capitalists, insead of Anarcho Socialist.)

 

Tea party I find kind of embarrassingly right wing. Killing the United States.

 

I think the American alliance with Britain, and Britain wanting to kill encryption (good luck with that) is definitely a sign of some kind of collapse.

 

 

The tea party kind that wishes to allow our infrastructure to fall apart, hates education and thinks investment of all kinds is the root of evil. This is killing our country.


  • LWFlouisa likes this

#37
LWFlouisa

LWFlouisa

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 97 posts
  • LocationNashChat

I'll clarify, when I say the collapse of America, I don't mean in the same way people like Alex Jones or Christ Greene say. I think they're distorting the concept. I'm talking more the kind of collapse that took down Rome: over a period of long decades where technology gradually declines, and / or society becomes more nature oriented. In this case: on one humanity branch society develops quantum computing and early interstellar travel, on the other society goes to a kind of pseudo middle ages. And usually the ones that do one or the other aren't what you expect...

 

For example, you might have India, China, or Japan developing Quantum computers while American descends into a decades long misery where slowly the quality of human production declines, as well as descending into a kind of collective dictatorship by the pseudo religious.

 

For a long time, China had actually been more advanced than the West, even in the bronze age. I don't think society will use bronze swords and axes again, but I do think a serious decline is coming.


Cerebrum Cerebellum -- Speculative Non-Fiction -- Writing

Luna Network -- Nodal Sneaker Network -- Programming

Published Works: https://www.wattpad.com/432077022-tevun-krus-44-sword-planet-the-intergalactic-heads


#38
kjaggard

kjaggard

    Artificer

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,900 posts
  • Locationwhere fanciful imaginings and hard won knowledge meet to genesis the future.


Live content within small means. Seek elegance rather than luxury, Grace over fashion and wealth over riches.
Listen to clouds and mountains, children and sages. Act bravely, think boldly.
Await occasions, never make haste. Find wonder and awe, by experiencing the everyday.

#39
kjaggard

kjaggard

    Artificer

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,900 posts
  • Locationwhere fanciful imaginings and hard won knowledge meet to genesis the future.

http://www.rexresear...lubb-empire.pdf

 

the fate of empires article I mentioned before.


  • Maximus likes this
Live content within small means. Seek elegance rather than luxury, Grace over fashion and wealth over riches.
Listen to clouds and mountains, children and sages. Act bravely, think boldly.
Await occasions, never make haste. Find wonder and awe, by experiencing the everyday.

#40
Maximus

Maximus

    Spaceman

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,728 posts
  • LocationCanada

http://www.rexresear...lubb-empire.pdf

 

the fate of empires article I mentioned before.

 

An interesting read, but there are a few problems I see with it:

 

1. According to Glubb, the average "lifespan" of an empire is about 250 years; he obviously picks the most convenient dates to fit into this narrative. However, the dates do have some meaning, as mentioned in the example of the Roman Empire; even though it lasted for another 2 centuries after Marcus Aurelius, it did so in a constant state of civil war, barbarian invasions and general chaos. Such conditions in the modern US would lead us to conclude that it had collapsed. My issue is that he uses like 10 empires for data in this study, completely ignoring Chinese and Indian civilization (the two other cradles of civilization). It would be far more interesting to see if this holds true across all of humanity, not just the Middle-East/Europe.

 

2. Does this apply to the modern US? Going by the value of 250 years, or 10 generations, the US (241 years old) is right about due for collapse. However, for most of its existence, the US has been no great power. Can we consider the the ragtag band of states in the 18th/19th centuries to be an empire, or a superpower? Certainly not in the same sense as the great ancient empires. No, the US only sprung onto the world stage in WWI, and it didn't achieve superpower status until after WWII. Just like the empires of old began as small villages or wandering tribes, the US only achieved supremacy after a period of rising power. Therefore, we aren't really at the end of the American "empire", but rather just getting started (just under 3 generations away from WWII). 

 

3. As shown in the example of Rome, you can divide a civilization into multiple phases. Even though the Republic ceased to be after a few hundred years, the Empire rose in its place and carried Roman civilization to far greater heights. The collapse of the US doesn't necessarily have to be a violent death at the hands of China; it can simply be the end of democracy, and the rise of some new ideology. 







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: United States, America, Future of United States, China, Russia, Cold War, 1970s, 9/11, Superpower, Pearl Harbor

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users