Hacker News Reader

Comment by maxglute | Hacker News Reader

When look past liberal world order propaganda, aka the libtard bubble, a lot of geopolitical reality seem to bias toward PRC, not because PRC is extra prescient or competent (even though they kind of are) but because libtard delude themselves into false models of how world works.

Pertaining to topic, current reality is HK isn't going to be rebellious stain on 1C2S like LIO types wanted, it's thoroughly cowed and new gen of HKers are going to be patriotic as fuck. For the simple reason that patriotic education / indoctorination actually works really well as statecraft tool. TW democratic disallusionment is growing YoY, and eventually they're going to have to reckon between being privledged cowed like HKers or becoming Gaza - it wasn't Israel begging for ceasefire and Israel has less autonomy over Gaza than PRC over TW in a cross strait scenario.

View on HN

Wow. That's a lot of modern keywords you have there. Now I am curious about your brain/point of view.

1. When you say "libtards," do you mean non-authoritarian democracy believers? If not, then what does that mean exactly?

2. How do you see Taiwan's sovereignty in the next few years? Will the CCP kill many, and put the rest into re-education camps, or will that be entirely unnecessary?

Liberal world order / zombie democracy gud types. My brain / pov is just boring realism and recognizing a lot of strategic trendlines is going in PRC favor.

TW fine until mid 2030s, tldr is that is around crossing point where current baked in procurement / strategic investments will give PRC potentially unassailable geostrategic advantages vs US+co. If shit hits fan it will likely be around then.

CCP / at least Xi will be magnanmous because he's just a dove / nice boy. But war is war, no one really controls escalation, gaza is not first choice (especially for softie like Xi) but when ability to do a TW gaza, it is on the table and sometimes inevitable result from escalation dynamics.

How postwar TW gets treated depends on nature of capitulation, i.e. hearts and minds vs pacfication, if PRC paid high price in blood then domestic audience will want blood. But most of effort is patriotic education, i.e. school curriculum pro PRC material and next gen sentiment will automatically shift. Mass reeducation wasn't neccessary in HK who was broken relatively bloodlessly, and now new gen of kids shaped from PRC textbooks are going to have different brains than those shaped by British whose position is going to continue getting clowned on in public messaging until it becomes new norm. But would the extra intransient elements be whisked to mainland for re3ducation, probably - explicitly endorsed by PRC french ambassador at one point.

Ultimately how TW seperatist gets treated is matter of petty PRC bloodlust and local TW bloodlust. As with political jockeying during upheaval, anticipate a lot of pro seperatist TWers simply getting bumped off by local internicine factional violence for getting TW into shitfest in first place. The amount of organized crime influence in TW is too damn high, and all of them know they can instantly transform from gangster to legitimate political power post occupation by getting on Beijings good side, and some are actively being groomed for the role via United Front, see triad leading Chinese Unification Promotion Party (CUPP). They're going to be bashing skulls on behalf of Beijing.

Thanks for the reply. Very interesting reading.

If I may ask, what type of global order would you like to see in your lifetime, now that Pax Americana has ended?

TBH whatever comes, comes. What I want to see in context to what I think is coming: IMO US/PRC bipolarity. The most favourable result for the world is to have 2 alternative, comprehensive tech stacks to develop from instead of depending on whims of single hegemon who controls entire tech tree. PRC/US/developed west will be fine, as in they can collapse/decline so far, but not to subsistent developing country levels due to capita accumulation. They can continue to jockey for podium positions. All the poors need to buy cheap Chinese renewables and capital equipment and up their development game which has never been more accessible. For the big players, peaceful transition / handover of regional hegemony / spheres of influence but that's a tall ask.

My issue is that we have nukes... a lot of countries have nukes. We are just a swiss cheese model alignment from the end of all that we love.

If Trump traded 1/3 of Ukraine for RU and USA disarming, then even I would happily hand him the Peace Prize.

That is the opposite of what happened. I am curious what the future archeologists will see when they dig through the ashes.

If say China failed to “Gaza” Taiwan - because, well, China has never successfully launched a maritime invasion in its long history - would your world-view change? Or are you a ride-or-die Central Committee man, every other thought is impossible, the province of us “liberal retards”?

Person A claims US overmatch can Gaza Havana.

Person B claims Bay of pigs failed / maritime invasion hard.

Person B argument retarded because US doesn't need to invade to Gaza Cuba.

Person B is admitting they lack 101 subject matter knowledge, to even bring up maritime invasion (because that's the context PRC/TW scenario is presented in lay news) is kind of so stupid it's not even wrong when talking about razing TW into Gaza.

TLDR PRC doesn't need to invade TW to Gaza it. They can now do it trivially from mainland fires. That's the current military reality. There doesn't need to be single foot on the ground to starve island with 90% energy and calorie import needs, and there's functionally nothing US+co can do about it, at least not for next 10+ years where procurement is locked in, and assuming PRC MIC somehow regress. So when I say PRC can Gaza TW, I mean statistically, with the currently correlation of forces across the strait, PRC can conventionally level TW like Gaza, without any amphib effort, just like US can simply glass Havanna from CONUS. That should not be controversial statement if you understand the actual #s involved. I mean delulu libtards are free to think delulu impossible thoughts, but some of them are, in fact functionally in the realm of impossible.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com