Jump to content
UnevenEdge

The Rise of America, BRICS, and the Industrial Revolution


Recommended Posts

On 6/6/2023 at 2:01 AM, scoobdog said:

The recent rise of white nationalism in peacetime throughout the West would suggest otherwise.  Also, Hitler did not invent Facism.

some would argue white nationalism never wet  away, which is i believe is true. i mean this countrys history is white nationalist history. i was more refferrig to how we got to where we are today, which PhilosopherStoned was talking about. usa has always taken territory since it started out. but the country didnt become top dog since after ww2. it took both world wars to change the order of things in the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Distortedreasoning said:

some would argue white nationalism never wet  away, which is i believe is true. i mean this countrys history is white nationalist history. i was more refferrig to how we got to where we are today, which PhilosopherStoned was talking about. usa has always taken territory since it started out. but the country didnt become top dog since after ww2. it took both world wars to change the order of things in the world.

It’s trajectory into the top economy was determined by its robust manufacturing expansion following the Civil War, actually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, scoobdog said:

It’s trajectory into the top economy was determined by its robust manufacturing expansion following the Civil War, actually.

This is true, and the industrial revolutions progress today owes itself quite a bit to the world wars and the u.s. politicical effort. Roosevelt even banned the production of civilian automobiles altogether to ensure we got those 'module t' Humvees and tanks out there.. As much as I love history lessons I'd still like him to get to the point. :|

Edited by PhilosipherStoned
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, PhilosipherStoned said:

This is true, and the industrial revolutions progress today owes itself quite abit to the world wars and the u.s. politicians political effotes though. Roosevelt even banned the production of civilian automobiles altogether to ensure we got those 'module t' Humvees and tanks out there.. As much as I love history lessons I'd still like him to get to the point. :|

I think that was his point.  He’s trying to shoehorn our industrial expansion into our somewhat meager history as a colonial power.  We were late to the game and, while we we’re certainly no less brutal, our foreign expansion was already facing headwinds before it started.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, scoobdog said:

I think that was his point.  He’s trying to shoehorn our industrial expansion into our somewhat meager history as a colonial power.  We were late to the game and, while we we’re certainly no less brutal, our foreign expansion was already facing headwinds before it started.

but... I want him to explain how U.S. retaliation or even the subsequent 'occupations' which arent even really occupations we have military bases that usually work to the countries benefit.. Japan, Germany, South Korea.. The aire of civilians or local populations is usually one of duality which I understand. It's just not many of those local people are going to say they wish the axis powers would've won or that they'd rather have been occupied by the other side. :|

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, PhilosipherStoned said:

but... I want him to explain how U.S. retaliation or even the subsequent 'occupations' which arent even really occupations we have military bases that usually work to the countries benefit.. Japan, Germany, South Korea.. The aire of civilians or local populations is usually one of duality which I understand. It's just not many of those local people are going to say they wish the axis powers would've won or that they'd rather have been occupied by the other side. :|

 

 

There isn’t an explanation.  America First is an ideology that adapts to its times rather than reflecting them.  It’s usually far more deeply rooted in socioeconomic stratification because the core tenant of equal distribution is dependent on a closed market.  Chances are, distorted is probably also for closed borders and restricted immigration, just not for the racist reasons that conservative have.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you guys familiar with BRICS? It's the geopolitical grouping of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, but China is the largest, most power member by far. 

It's actually a very bizarre story. 

It's envisioned as a counterweight to the Western world order of things like the G7, NATO, the World Bank, IMF and UN. But in practice, its members and biggest cheerleaders are people who hate the USA and want it to see the US lose its status in the world, which they see as unfair.

 

I call BRICS the Club of US's Angry Exes. It makes as about as much sense. 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, scoobdog said:

It’s trajectory into the top economy was determined by its robust manufacturing expansion following the Civil War, actually.

i mean manufacturing did help, but i would argue that the exploitation of the workers and the further expansion of land in the newer territories played a bigger role in that upward trajectory. i mean im sure eventually we would have surpassed britain as the top hegemon. but i think its safe to say both world wars left all of our rivals in ruins, and the usa came out relatively unscathed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, PhilosipherStoned said:

This is true, and the industrial revolutions progress today owes itself quite a bit to the world wars and the u.s. politicical effort. Roosevelt even banned the production of civilian automobiles altogether to ensure we got those 'module t' Humvees and tanks out there.. As much as I love history lessons I'd still like him to get to the point. :|

you asked me how did we get there, and i gave you the answer right away. ww1 and ww2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Distortedreasoning said:

you asked me how did we get there, and i gave you the answer right away. ww1 and ww2.

You did...So are you really doing this 'welcome your dictactor shit still' or do you just not get the vibes? Like I said every country on the list you speak of would agree at least today that they don't want to go back to those days... No mulligans no bullshit...So explain your "rhetoric" and stop deflecting. How is the U.S. the most disgustingly socialistic government..or whatever the fuck you were going for.. 

Don't get it.. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, PhilosipherStoned said:

but... I want him to explain how U.S. retaliation or even the subsequent 'occupations' which arent even really occupations we have military bases that usually work to the countries benefit.. Japan, Germany, South Korea.. The aire of civilians or local populations is usually one of duality which I understand. It's just not many of those local people are going to say they wish the axis powers would've won or that they'd rather have been occupied by the other side. :|

 

 

japan and germany are both results of ww2. they lost. and south korea from usa intervention in response to the spread of socialism in korea. there are many people in those countries you listed that are not happy having us there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, scoobdog said:

There isn’t an explanation.  America First is an ideology that adapts to its times rather than reflecting them.  It’s usually far more deeply rooted in socioeconomic stratification because the core tenant of equal distribution is dependent on a closed market.  Chances are, distorted is probably also for closed borders and restricted immigration, just not for the racist reasons that conservative have.

seriously? i know youve seen me complain about the immigration policies here.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Distortedreasoning said:

japan and germany are both results of ww2. they lost. and south korea from usa intervention in response to the spread of socialism in korea. there are many people in those countries you listed that are not happy having us there. 

Just because one party loses a war does NOT mean sentiments vanish..Also rememeber when I used the word "duality".

I've been to all of those places I listed as a soldier.. It's just....There still are born nationalists in all those areas that would side WITH me. It's crazy that sometimes they have to be historian or history oriented peeps..but take the story of unit 731 for example. For decades the depravity of that 'unit' was chaulked up to conspiracy iN JAPAN the actual country of question.... until actual Japanese historians said hmm wait a minute..traveled to the U.S.A, and found shit their own governmernt was trying to play down... dude.

 

 

Edited by PhilosipherStoned
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Icarus27k said:

Are you guys familiar with BRICS? It's the geopolitical grouping of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, but China is the largest, most power member by far. 

It's actually a very bizarre story. 

It's envisioned as a counterweight to the Western world order of things like the G7, NATO, the World Bank, IMF and UN. But in practice, its members and biggest cheerleaders are people who hate the USA and want it to see the US lose its status in the world, which they see as unfair.

 

I call BRICS the Club of US's Angry Exes. It makes as about as much sense. 

brics>g7

g7 is on the decline and brics is on the rise. more countries talking about joining it. the world is tired of the west. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Distortedreasoning said:

i mean manufacturing did help, but i would argue that the exploitation of the workers and the further expansion of land in the newer territories played a bigger role in that upward trajectory. i mean im sure eventually we would have surpassed britain as the top hegemon. but i think its safe to say both world wars left all of our rivals in ruins, and the usa came out relatively unscathed. 

You could argue that, but you would be wrong.  Setting aside the fact worker exploitation is intrinsic to rapid infrastructural expansion through flaws in human behavior, you can’t reasonably argue that the modest colonial push into Latin America and Oceania that was mostly concurrent with parabellum America had anything to do with the expansion of intercontinental rail, the requisite steel and lumber manufacturers that fueled and benefited from that, and the vast unimproved area in the continental US that provided both resources and room for expansion.  The US benefitted from a unique combination of being an emerging society during a profound technological breakthrough.  Yes, the United States did not have fight battles on its own shores (Guam is an exception but it was also a far flung outpost), but even if it had, it was already in a better position to recover and rebuild than Europe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Distortedreasoning said:

brics>g7

g7 is on the decline and brics is on the rise. more countries talking about joining it. the world is tired of the west. 

Even if the world is getting tired of the West, BRICS is not the answer. Russia is a shithole in decline and China is poised to face the worst demographic crisis ever experienced. Why the hell is South Africa even part of the equation? I think BRICS is being brought up again because Russia is all pissy over the sanctions.

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, PhilosipherStoned said:

Just because one party loses a war does NOT mean sentiments vanish..Also rememeber when I used the word "duality".

I've been to all of those places I listed as a soldier.. It's just....There still are born nationalists in all those areas that would side WITH me. It's crazy that sometimes they have to be historian or history oriented peeps..but take the story of unit 731 for example. For decades the depravity of that 'unit' was chaulked up to conspiracy iN JAPAN the actual country of question.... until actual Japanese historians said hmm wait a minute..traveled to the U.S.A, and found shit their own governmernt was trying to play down... dude.

 

 

you do know i am not in favor of the nazi german government or the imperialist japanese governments of ww2 correct? those ideology's were defeated. russia did most the heavy lifting against germany. the usa was right to get involved against japan. korea tho we absolutely had no business being there. my argument is that yes we stayed and helped rebuild in germany/japan but those nations have long recovered. say what you want about korea, but facts are our meddling made the situation worse, and is a big reason why things are the way they are in these times. 

 

also how can you not be in the military and not be aware of the rampant sex crimes in said bases? 

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2021/03/18/national/social-issues/okinawa-women-military-violence/

https://www.latimes.com/archives/blogs/world-now/story/2011-10-20/alleged-rapes-by-u-s-soldiers-ratchet-up-anger-in-south-korea

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Insipid said:

Even if the world is getting tired of the West, BRICS is not the answer. Russia is a shithole in decline and China is poised to face the worst demographic crisis ever experienced. Why the hell is South Africa even part of the equation? I think BRICS is being brought up again because Russia is all pissy over the sanctions.

It’s interesting BRICS is having a moment right when China is clamping down on its financial sector after stifling its tech industry. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Korea tho we had absolutely no business being there'... My high school did a weirder thing than foreign exchange students if more schools didn't do this....

I can hear a certain foreign exhange teachers fustration in not just seeking you out in kicking you in the balls for insiniuating a bit too much at least. 

 

 

Edited by PhilosipherStoned
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, scoobdog said:

You could argue that, but you would be wrong.  Setting aside the fact worker exploitation is intrinsic to rapid infrastructural expansion through flaws in human behavior, you can’t reasonably argue that the modest territorial expansion that was mostly concurrent with parabellum America had anything to do with the expansion of intercontinental rail, the requisite steel and lumber manufacturers that fueled and benefited from that, and the vast unimproved area in the continental US that provided both resources and room for expansion.  The US benefitted from a unique combination of being an emerging society during a profound technological breakthrough.  Yes, the United States did not have fight battles on its own shores (Guam is an exception but it was also a far flung outpost), but even if it had, it was already in a better position to recover and rebuild than Europe.

agree to disagree. many nations were on a fast pace of rise in manufacturing. japan or instance had an even crazier pace of advancement in a shorter amount of time. and germany manufacturing was also on the rise. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, PhilosipherStoned said:

Most Brazilians dont give a fuck about shit like that. When you have a leader that says yes sir to Trump a lot when the majority is still knowing both of 'em are stooges sure...

BRIC... So that's your game. I...   Thank you that is it. :clown:

 

youre thinking of the former bolsonaro, clown. these brazilians just elected a president that is making them much more friendly to the brics nations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Distortedreasoning said:

agree to disagree. many nations were on a fast pace of rise in manufacturing. japan or instance had an even crazier pace of advancement in a shorter amount of time. and germany manufacturing was also on the rise. 

And they also had far more extensive imperialistic reach that, opposed to the United States, was critical to their ability expand.  We didn’t need colonies to fuel our industries, we just had to build inside our continental borders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Insipid said:

Even if the world is getting tired of the West, BRICS is not the answer. Russia is a shithole in decline and China is poised to face the worst demographic crisis ever experienced. Why the hell is South Africa even part of the equation? I think BRICS is being brought up again because Russia is all pissy over the sanctions.

more propaganda. china has been the fastest economically growing nation and will continue to grow. cope with that.

 

south africa and russia are close. russia got many friends in africa. cope.   

  • D'oh 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Distortedreasoning said:

youre thinking of the former bolsonaro, clown. these brazilians just elected a president that is making them much more friendly to the brics nations. 

The Kremlin wasn't sucking every candidites dick lik they did Trump either were they? Fair enough on Lula though. I've gotten behind on Brazilian tmes it seems. 

 

 

Edited by PhilosipherStoned
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Distortedreasoning said:

more propaganda. china has been the fastest economically growing nation and will continue to grow. cope with that.

 

south africa and russia are close. russia got many friends in africa. cope.   

BRICS should be rearranged to CRIBS, as it's mostly China and Russia trying and failing to influence global politics, Brazil and South Africa are on the other end, in order of (ir)relevancy, and India is stuck in the middle. Also, anyone outside of the CRIBS that supports it are babies.

Wasn't that so clever? Not really. Cope.

Edited by Insipid
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

keep being in denial of chinas and russias influence. 

like mentioned earlier, russia has friends in many african countries and other parts of the world. both india and china benefitting from russian oil. europe on the other hand, dont look at germany or britain now. who bombed the nordstream pipelines again? 

and china is tied to the world economy being the worlds leading manufacturer. denying its influence shows how delusional you are. just as delusional as the usa. 

  • D'oh 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, scoobdog said:

I’m preemptively breaking this conversation off so Pat doesn’t have to do it.

What does that mean when DF is no longer a thing? I've been thinking this thread has been fucked now myself. Honestly ever since he said BRIC my job is done I guess, but I fudged. xD

Edited by PhilosipherStoned
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Distortedreasoning said:

more propaganda. china has been the fastest economically growing nation and will continue to grow. cope with that.

 

south africa and russia are close. russia got many friends in africa. cope.   

 

This is China's annual GDP growth since 1990. 2019, the last year before COVID-19 skewered the data, was China's slowest year since 1990. 

 

Screenshot_20230607-172353.thumb.png.75b6e5ef7619807906c8d382106f0c02.png

 

In 2007, China's annual growth peaked at 14.2%.  In 2012, it was 7.9%. In 2017, 6.9%. 

 

So it's been on a steady decline for 15 years. 

Edited by Icarus27k
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Insipid said:

BRICS should be rearranged to CRIBS, as it's mostly China and Russia trying and failing to influence global politics, Brazil and South Africa are on the other end, in order of (ir)relevancy, and India is stuck in the middle. Also, anyone outside of the CRIBS that supports it are babies.

Wasn't that so clever? Not really. Cope.

CRIBS be like giphy.gif

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Icarus27k said:

 

This is China's annual GDP growth since 1990. 2019, the last year before COVID-19 skewered the data, was China's slowest year since 1990. 

 

Screenshot_20230607-172353.thumb.png.75b6e5ef7619807906c8d382106f0c02.png

 

In 2007, China's annual growth peaked at 14.2%.  In 2012, it was 7.9%. In 2017, 6.9%. 

 

So it's been on a steady decline for 15 years. 

a rate of growth that still surpasses that of the usa even in their worst year. the west wishes it had 6.9% growth. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, stilgar said:

Yes, because you do not blindly love anything or one that is anti US.

I don't know how he knows my foreign policy beliefs when I rarely talk about foreign policy.

I don't talk about it much because I, unlike distorted, have grown out of pretending to know about complicated things I don't know. I can barely keep track of the states. 90% of the time a foreign policy conversation is going, I'm like "da fuck they talkin bout?" It makes my head spin. I'm not confident in most of my opinions on foreign things that aren't "genocide bad" or "that one policy cool" or the like. Does he think I'm in favor of Guantanamo Bay torture camps 'cuz 'Murica? Like wtf?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Distortedreasoning said:

a rate of growth that still surpasses that of the usa even in their worst year. the west wishes it had 6.9% growth. 

China does have higher annual GDP growth than the U.S., but my point is China's growth has been declining for over a decade. 

Will China continue to have higher than the U.S. in the future? Maybe or maybe not. 

Edited by Icarus27k
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, stilgar said:

Yes, because you do not blindly love anything or one that is anti US.

 

The Ukraine war has messed some people up. Some decided to throw in with Russia in this conflict and are thus sprouting Russian government talking points on other topics.

 

It's loyalty in a way, but loyalty to Russia. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Icarus27k said:

 

The Ukraine war has messed some people up. Some decided to throw in with Russia in this conflict and are thus sprouting Russian government talking points on other topics.

 

It's loyalty in a way, but loyalty to Russia. 

You just got here, so that's a fair assertion....but that's not what's happening. This rhetoric of distorted's is far older than the conflict in Ukraine.

I even agree with him on a few things but he's all finger wags with no solution in mind.

I don't find him as abrasive as his pal was...the guy who wants to shame people for not forcefully breaking from the 2 party system and just tossing votes at green regardless of what trash they are propping up as a candidate.

I think I can be persuaded to even be in this camp if they had anything other than a list of American atrocities.

They are literally trying to hide slavery, revert women's rights back to the 30s, and make it ok to harass anyone who doesn't immediately identify with their genitals....I don't need to look at the shit they've done abroad to sell me on the "America is shitty and not as great as we think" platform...But I'm gonna need more than tears to make it my mantra.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, naraku360 said:

I don't know how he knows my foreign policy beliefs when I rarely talk about foreign policy.

I don't talk about it much because I, unlike distorted, have grown out of pretending to know about complicated things I don't know. I can barely keep track of the states. 90% of the time a foreign policy conversation is going, I'm like "da fuck they talkin bout?" It makes my head spin. I'm not confident in most of my opinions on foreign things that aren't "genocide bad" or "that one policy cool" or the like. Does he think I'm in favor of Guantanamo Bay torture camps 'cuz 'Murica? Like wtf?

im just taking a guess since many people here dont really say what they believe in *foreign policy wise* or dont make many threads about what is going on with our global affairs. many of the points of view ive seen express here are much in line with msm talking points. that is to say, theres no difference between the arguments here, and the ones made by the state. so if i guessed wrong, my bad. 

 

believe it or not, i do pay attention, and have been paying attention for a while now. i feel that its an important part in helping to explain the why things are the way they are in society. this goes beyond  the basic democrat/republican, us/them narratives that dominate the nations politics today. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Icarus27k said:

 

The Ukraine war has messed some people up. Some decided to throw in with Russia in this conflict and are thus sprouting Russian government talking points on other topics.

 

It's loyalty in a way, but loyalty to Russia. 

not everything is "russian talking points". like what a convenient way to avoid other points.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...