If China loses a future war, entropy could be imminent

TR_123456

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
4,771
Reactions
11,704
Nation of residence
Nethelands
Nation of origin
Turkey
1600460162025.png

China's Communist Party leaders and delegates, including President Xi Jinping, sit at the opening of the National People's Congress on May 22, 2020, in Beijing, China. (Kevin Frayer/Getty Images)


What happens if China engages in a great power conflict and loses? Will the Chinese Communist Party’s control over the society survive a horrifying defeat?

The People’s Liberation Army last fought a massive-scale war during the invasion of Vietnam in 1979, which was a failed operation to punish Vietnam for toppling the Khmer Rouge regime of Cambodia. Since 1979, the PLA has been engaged in shelling Vietnam at different occasions and involved in other border skirmishes, but not fought a full-scale war.

In the last decades, China increased its defense spending and modernized its military, including advanced air defenses and cruise missiles; fielded advanced military hardware; and built a high sea navy from scratch. But there is significant uncertainty of how the Chinese military will perform.

Modern warfare is integration, joint operations, command, control, intelligence, and the ability to understand and execute the ongoing, all-domain fight. War is a complex machinery with low margins of error and can have devastating outcomes for the ill-prepared. It does not matter if you are against or for the U.S. military operations the last three decades; the fact is that the prolonged conflict and engagement have made the U.S. experienced. The Chinese inexperience, in combination with unrealistic expansionist ambitions, can be the downfall of the regime. Dry swimmers maybe train the basics, but they are never great swimmers.

Although it may look like a creative strategy for China to harvest trade secrets and intellectual property as well as put developing countries in debt to gain influence, I would question how rational the Chinese apparatus is. The repeated visualization of the Han nationalist cult appears as a strength amid the youth rallying behind President Xi Jinping’s regime, but it is also a significant weakness. The weakness is blatantly visible in the Chinese need for surveillance and population control to maintain stability — surveillance and repression that is so encompassing in the daily life of the Chinese population that German DDR security services appear to have been amateurs.


All chauvinist cults will implode over time because the unrealistic assumptions add up, and so will the sum of all delusional ideological decisions. Winston Churchill knew after Nazi Germany declared war on the United States in December 1941 that the Allies would prevail and win the war. Nazi Germany did not have the gross domestic product or manpower to sustain the war on two fronts, but the Nazis did not care because they were irrational and driven by hateful ideology. Nazi Germany had just months before it invaded the massive Soviet Union to create Lebensraum and feed an urge to reestablish German-Austrian dominance in Eastern Europe. The Nazis unilaterally declared war on the United States. The rationale for the declaration of war was ideology, a worldview that demanded expansion and conflict, even if Germany was strategically inferior and eventually lost the war.

China’s belief that it can be a global authoritarian hegemony is likely on the same journey. China is today driven by its flavor or expansionist ideology that seeks conflict without being strategically able. It is worth noting that not a single major country is China’s ally.


The Chinese supremacist propaganda works in peacetime, holding massive rallies and hailing Mao Zedong as a military genius, and some of its people sing, dance and wave red banners, but will that grip remain if the PLA loses? In case of a failed military campaign, is the Chinese population, with the one-child policy, ready for casualties, humiliation and failure? Will the authoritarian grip — with facial recognition, informers, digital surveillance and an army that primarily functions during peacetime as a force for crowd control — survive a crushing defeat?

If the regime loses its grip, the wrath of the masses may be unleashed from decades of repression. A country of the size of China — with a history of cleavages and civil wars, and that has a suppressed, diverse population and socioeconomic disparity — can be catapulted into Balkanization after a defeat. In the past, China has had long periods of internal fragmentation and weak central government.



The United States reacts differently to failure. The United States is as a country far more resilient than we might assume from watching the daily news. If the United States loses a war, the president gets the blame, but there will still be a presidential library in his/her name. There is no revolution.


There is an assumption lingering over today’s public debate that China has a strong hand, advanced artificial intelligence and the latest technology, and that it is an uber-able superpower.

I am not convinced.

During the last decade, the countries in the Indo-Pacific region that seeks to hinder the Chinese expansion of control, influence and dominance have increasingly formed stronger relationships. The strategic scale is in the democratic countries' favor. If China, still driven by ideology, pursues conflict at a large scale, it is likely the end of the communist dictatorship. In my personal view, we should pay more attention to the humanitarian risks, the ripple effects and the dangers of nukes in a civil war in case the Chinese regime implodes after a failed future war.

 

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Aviation Specialist
Messages
9,334
Reactions
96 18,922
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
Totalitarian regimes are indeed the most brittle overall, they leave little buffer for operation of genuine rooted morality that is the longest term and most significant "stone" manifestation of truth in the human psyche that gives rise to all identity and culture that lasts...which then provide the mortar most willingly for the stone.

Totalitarians forget what they even are over time....they merely usurp what is there for their own fickle and wicked ends. Power for power sake...how else can such things end?
 

Gary

Experienced member
Messages
7,825
Reactions
21 12,414
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia

TR_123456

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
4,771
Reactions
11,704
Nation of residence
Nethelands
Nation of origin
Turkey
Totalitarian regimes are indeed the most brittle overall, they leave little buffer for operation of genuine rooted morality that is the longest term and most significant "stone" manifestation of truth in the human psyche that gives rise to all identity and culture that lasts...which then provide the mortar most willingly for the stone.

Totalitarians forget what they even are over time....they merely usurp what is there for their own fickle and wicked ends. Power for power sake...how else can such things end?
So,what you're saying in plain and simple english is,
You have to have a free will to fight for your country?
 

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Aviation Specialist
Messages
9,334
Reactions
96 18,922
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
So,what you're saying in plain and simple english is,
You have to have a free will to fight for your country?

I haven't given a long reply in a while (or yet here)...so here goes, apologies in advance if it turned into a bit of a rant (tbh I just kept adding on to it and lost track....oh well)....

Yes there must be some route of genuine and organic transmission of free-will sentiments (and the more nuanced control structures found in general society below highest representations) and such activity from the ruled to the rulers....so they are all on same page as far as possible.

This was the basic driving force and root enlightenment to create and develop democracy. Authority has no true meaning and purpose in the end if it cannot be questioned and challenged.

If you have polarised, extremely-stratified ruling class (or single investiture into one person), the ruled become serfs effectively (and given human nature and entropy long term...inevitably) to be used as seen fit and disposed of when seen fit (they only luck out somewhat when the despot is "enlightened" or "benevolent" etc..but these are temporary and cannot be relied upon to happen enough).

All this extreme concentration of power (authoritarianism and its bigger, nastier brother totalitarianism) is done in the name of whatever narrative(s) used by such ruler(s) ...be it divine providence, extreme paranoia to another entity, collectivism and many others.

The whole nature of the existence of the nation state then basically hinges on just how long the rulers can hold sway by force (by any means necessary, as he has simply dictated the ends) over the masses...

This force correlates inversely to the permeation of that narrative organically in people's actual minds (which are crucially NEVER truly accessible to the power-wielders and what they inevitably fear the most in the end).

With respect to China specifically (that the CCP tries to be, but will NEVER be):

The Confucian philosophy postulates/idealises a balance of 50/50 among two forces that compete...among many other things.....control and freedom (some prefer to transmute it to order vs chaos too).

Lot of it can be learned from specifically why it arose, but that is ironically not studied these days at all in the land that created and developed it. Why? That's because it needs a fundamentally open enquiring mind contrary to the visions/ideals the power-wielders in China (and all their supporters and apologists) have aligned to and now seem to be increasingly emboldened by.

It has sorely gone wrong in this land, this great civilisation...I shudder to think what the final cost will be on them and many others....because all existence is cyclical in the end.

In the earlier gathering a lot of us were part of, I challenged a few presuppositions of some Chinese there (when I was more friendly to them)...but specifically in Cantonese (because they clumsily assumed a few things about me not knowing much or living much among Chinese people...assumption they get right 99% of time till they stumble on the 1%).

It was not to be rude to them (given they are mandarin conversant/entrenched for the most part)....but simply there is a deep story in why Cantonese is specifically Cantonese in the end today (and hearing them side by side, almost anyone can make out the difference).

From that I could ascertain these CCP-stronk-types, self certified ubermensch.... learn nothing of their own history's most important parts, consequences and the deepest lessons from their earlier golden ages and dark ages. If they do, they dont contemplate anything meaningful on it.

Much of it is captured in the language itself (as gateway to further evidence), the transition from old chinese to middle chinese specifically...and which Chinese language today preserves most of the original conservative way and why (interlinked to one dynasty period specifically and philosophical approach it permeated)...and what can be learned from that more deeply. Hint: not Mandarin.

This is all simply ignored....they are simply told (and harp on like broken record) that Emperor Qin standardised the writing script and unified the language and that's that...and the gwongdungwah's are some kind of weirdo yokels south.

i.e Only harness from the past a very few specific distillations....mostly what passes the CCP filter for some "modern" political application today.

With this level of sheer stupidity governing approach to their own "Han" (and the speech marks are deliberate by me)...what true chance is there for a genuine existence of Tibetans and Uighurs within this kind of political fold?

I would say the yin-yang balance is truly skewed and screwed now.


@Saiyan0321 @Joe Shearer @VCheng @KAL-EL @Sinan @xenon5434
 

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Aviation Specialist
Messages
9,334
Reactions
96 18,922
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
@Vergennes forgot to tag you to this thread to have a read (esp above)....

Some may have issue with the following controversial messenger, but the message in this video really goes into depth about a more specific instance of what I am harping about above, for those with interest in this subject at hand:


The quite strong irony is what was done against the "olds" during the cultural revolution (incl the Daoist+Confucian grounding of such things as Tai Chi and Kung Fu).

Yet now the CCP have maneuvered back to some of the "olds" being more useful for a (selectively curated and applied) cultural inheritance. Likely more for the sake and appearance and more practical utility of having one since others have them, despite whatever Mao originally envisioned and what his ultimate intentions were with purging it all and starting afresh.

It is quite the ultimate shock-gaslighting a regime can do to its people in just one generation or less. But its not surprising given the quick extreme reversal on the falun gong (by the CCP) in just a space of a few years.

Hence this extreme persecution of Xu Xiaodong by the CCP, who might have been at one time celebrated for defeating the "olds". Of course his support towards critics of the crackdown on HK and the coverup of coronavirus handling by CCP likely have done more on top to attract further anger and clampdown/control on him by the CCP.

If the video is not of interest or too long for your preference, here is summary of what has happened regarding him on wiki:

 

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom