A good comment sent to me by Michael Laske, a long-time subscriber. Posted here with his permission:
Hi Robert,
At times during the last 9 months I became disenchanted with the ideological background of some of your essays and posts, while still enjoying your range of knowledge and analytical capability.
When I think about our times from a global perspective , I constantly witness the pendulum-like movements of ideas and acceptances. The U.S. has, indeed, shifted far to the right and caused tremendous internal and external discord in the process, which will engender a shift back to the left within the next five years. This unfortunate series of events brought about by an immoral, corrupt, but well prepared, MAGA administration was unfortunately predictable. And the prognosis became fact. Few of us like or were adequately prepared for the reality presented to us.
From a U.S perspective, the one positive out of this difficult year was the awakening of the liberal economists to the understanding that production and local sufficiency matters much more than previously considered. Out-sourcing and cost efficiencies were
no longer the only salient factors. How this works its way through the system is a question point.
While I accept and agree with your comments about the US. I think your patriotism sends you off track regarding China, especially the economy. A good stock market after 15 years of stagnation may not indicate a turning point. I have been in China since 1989 and not since 1990-1 have I seen such a downbeat macroeconomy, especially the heavy industrial and mobility sectors. Usually, there is a great spike every fourth quarter, which failed to materialize this year. Chinese companies will now need to balance
overseas and domestic investment and production. Capital will need freer movement and the concerns and requirements of the lender are much different than those of the borrower or home market. Politics and social policy will need adjustment.
China is strong and has provided technology and services and a new model for the world. I have been involved with technical innovation here for over three decades. Still, I wonder whether China has climbed one hill only to find that it requires a new mountain to maintain its momentum. Attention needs to be paid to domestic and social issues. Economic growth and cultural requirements may not resolve the challenges of the next decade. Self sufficiency cannot resolve
the problems of inequality.
Finally, I have believed for about a decade that the U.S.’s problems are China’s problems, which in turn are the main global problems. Climate Change, AI and its consequences, and economic disparity are not going away. Can China and the U.S. work together to establish a useful framework for the future-environmentally, economically, and militarily? Can trust be developed in time?
It's a unique privilege of a writer to be read, and to receive response from his/her readers. For this I am very grateful.
I agree with close to everything you wrote here. The US is recuperating, and still has a lot of inner strength. China certainly has deep problems of its own, which I am also not shy to point out. And also, I 100% agree that the only thing that matters is whether US and China can sit down and work together again on tasks that would require cooperation. I think this good "fight" in 2025 sets the stage for that.
For someone like me who seek to understand facts above everything else, belonging to any "ideology" is a strong accusation can cause a lot of self-reflection. I don't like "ideology", which I define as a rigid set of ideas that someone has to conform to no matter what's factual, and I hope I am still not stepping towards that territory. At least I am consciously trying not to.
However, I do recognize I am biased. If anything, living in China and setting my future life and career here, I am inherently long-biased. I want it to do well. So I can never be a 100% bystander in this.
That's pretty good. I especially like seeing Noah enter a sputtering stage wherein he's made to look the fool he is. The only thing I'd add is the elephant in the room; no one's talking about it. It's so big, it fills the room; there's no room left to talk. To whit...
The incompatibility of liberal democracy with large populations in incredibly complex societies. It's not like no one's noticed it before...Aristotle, James Madison, Alexander Fraser Tytler, Lippmann...they all had on point observations about the inability of US type liberal democracy to handle things. It's not that I don't like the idea of it; I love the idea. But, it doesn't scale.
Mencken described democracy as "a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." There've been various examples of this throughout history, but the current situation in the US of A is putting it in stark relief. Compound it with the inherent problem of media conglomerates that have moved beyond the 4th Estate to arbiters of everything, making public service so miserable for anyone in office that only sociopaths find it attractive. Add the internet, designed to accelerate extremist engagement, and it sure seems like we've achieved critical mass for a meltdown. I'm not worried, but I've been in survival mode for the last 50 years. It seemed prudent.
Which is not to say I'm predicting disaster; only fools make predictions. But, the show's just starting. Pass the popcorn.
Sure, it applies, and I wouldn't argue its inevitability. One of Kissinger's revelations, upon entering government service, was his surprise at how the most important issues came down to one person's, or at most a couple people's, dictats.
Besides complexity, one of the reasons it does not scale is capitalism is anti-democratic. Even in a few city states of Greece, a small society based democracy was killed by elite capture. It took war and the destruction in search of more capital to instead destroy a great deal of capital and the ruling elite, followed by years of dictatorships to initiate a reset for the cycle to start over again. Eventually other modes of organization just trampled them into the ground. (edit: here is a clear example of one of the most democratic of things being bled dry by unrestrained capitalism: https://substack.com/inbox/post/182776985 )
I don't believe capitalism is inherently anti-democratic. Capitalists can be democratic or anti-democratic, Social Democrats can be anti-democratic, etc. Humanoid-like organisms are always the problem, not necessarily the system in which they operate.
Folks like to blame systems, which is ok with me. Personally, I've come closest to emulating Archibald "Harry" Tuttle, so it mostly slides by me. Humans are gonna human.
"A J-10C fighter jet ...." Likely the shoot down is true, but if so, credit goes last to the fighter jet. they were just a launcher for the missiles, it was the system of people, radar, software in the AWAC systems and the advanced missiles that did nearly all the heavy lifting.
A good comment sent to me by Michael Laske, a long-time subscriber. Posted here with his permission:
Hi Robert,
At times during the last 9 months I became disenchanted with the ideological background of some of your essays and posts, while still enjoying your range of knowledge and analytical capability.
When I think about our times from a global perspective , I constantly witness the pendulum-like movements of ideas and acceptances. The U.S. has, indeed, shifted far to the right and caused tremendous internal and external discord in the process, which will engender a shift back to the left within the next five years. This unfortunate series of events brought about by an immoral, corrupt, but well prepared, MAGA administration was unfortunately predictable. And the prognosis became fact. Few of us like or were adequately prepared for the reality presented to us.
From a U.S perspective, the one positive out of this difficult year was the awakening of the liberal economists to the understanding that production and local sufficiency matters much more than previously considered. Out-sourcing and cost efficiencies were
no longer the only salient factors. How this works its way through the system is a question point.
While I accept and agree with your comments about the US. I think your patriotism sends you off track regarding China, especially the economy. A good stock market after 15 years of stagnation may not indicate a turning point. I have been in China since 1989 and not since 1990-1 have I seen such a downbeat macroeconomy, especially the heavy industrial and mobility sectors. Usually, there is a great spike every fourth quarter, which failed to materialize this year. Chinese companies will now need to balance
overseas and domestic investment and production. Capital will need freer movement and the concerns and requirements of the lender are much different than those of the borrower or home market. Politics and social policy will need adjustment.
China is strong and has provided technology and services and a new model for the world. I have been involved with technical innovation here for over three decades. Still, I wonder whether China has climbed one hill only to find that it requires a new mountain to maintain its momentum. Attention needs to be paid to domestic and social issues. Economic growth and cultural requirements may not resolve the challenges of the next decade. Self sufficiency cannot resolve
the problems of inequality.
Finally, I have believed for about a decade that the U.S.’s problems are China’s problems, which in turn are the main global problems. Climate Change, AI and its consequences, and economic disparity are not going away. Can China and the U.S. work together to establish a useful framework for the future-environmentally, economically, and militarily? Can trust be developed in time?
Frankly, I don’t think much else matters.
Happy New Year,
Mlaske
my reply:
It's a unique privilege of a writer to be read, and to receive response from his/her readers. For this I am very grateful.
I agree with close to everything you wrote here. The US is recuperating, and still has a lot of inner strength. China certainly has deep problems of its own, which I am also not shy to point out. And also, I 100% agree that the only thing that matters is whether US and China can sit down and work together again on tasks that would require cooperation. I think this good "fight" in 2025 sets the stage for that.
For someone like me who seek to understand facts above everything else, belonging to any "ideology" is a strong accusation can cause a lot of self-reflection. I don't like "ideology", which I define as a rigid set of ideas that someone has to conform to no matter what's factual, and I hope I am still not stepping towards that territory. At least I am consciously trying not to.
However, I do recognize I am biased. If anything, living in China and setting my future life and career here, I am inherently long-biased. I want it to do well. So I can never be a 100% bystander in this.
Pro-America/Capitalism bias is built into modern business language, so that anything outside it grates against the inherent message.
https://www.kobo.com/ca/en/ebook/speaking-in-tongues-28
That's pretty good. I especially like seeing Noah enter a sputtering stage wherein he's made to look the fool he is. The only thing I'd add is the elephant in the room; no one's talking about it. It's so big, it fills the room; there's no room left to talk. To whit...
The incompatibility of liberal democracy with large populations in incredibly complex societies. It's not like no one's noticed it before...Aristotle, James Madison, Alexander Fraser Tytler, Lippmann...they all had on point observations about the inability of US type liberal democracy to handle things. It's not that I don't like the idea of it; I love the idea. But, it doesn't scale.
Mencken described democracy as "a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." There've been various examples of this throughout history, but the current situation in the US of A is putting it in stark relief. Compound it with the inherent problem of media conglomerates that have moved beyond the 4th Estate to arbiters of everything, making public service so miserable for anyone in office that only sociopaths find it attractive. Add the internet, designed to accelerate extremist engagement, and it sure seems like we've achieved critical mass for a meltdown. I'm not worried, but I've been in survival mode for the last 50 years. It seemed prudent.
Which is not to say I'm predicting disaster; only fools make predictions. But, the show's just starting. Pass the popcorn.
I would have worked Robert Michels’ The Iron Law of Oligarchy into this discussion. Just saying.
Sure, it applies, and I wouldn't argue its inevitability. One of Kissinger's revelations, upon entering government service, was his surprise at how the most important issues came down to one person's, or at most a couple people's, dictats.
Besides complexity, one of the reasons it does not scale is capitalism is anti-democratic. Even in a few city states of Greece, a small society based democracy was killed by elite capture. It took war and the destruction in search of more capital to instead destroy a great deal of capital and the ruling elite, followed by years of dictatorships to initiate a reset for the cycle to start over again. Eventually other modes of organization just trampled them into the ground. (edit: here is a clear example of one of the most democratic of things being bled dry by unrestrained capitalism: https://substack.com/inbox/post/182776985 )
I don't believe capitalism is inherently anti-democratic. Capitalists can be democratic or anti-democratic, Social Democrats can be anti-democratic, etc. Humanoid-like organisms are always the problem, not necessarily the system in which they operate.
Folks like to blame systems, which is ok with me. Personally, I've come closest to emulating Archibald "Harry" Tuttle, so it mostly slides by me. Humans are gonna human.
Exceptional summing up of a very complicated year.
"A J-10C fighter jet ...." Likely the shoot down is true, but if so, credit goes last to the fighter jet. they were just a launcher for the missiles, it was the system of people, radar, software in the AWAC systems and the advanced missiles that did nearly all the heavy lifting.