SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
China has a "stunning lead" over the US:
The Biden administration might be limiting China's ability to manufacture advanced chips, but according to an independent think tank, the Asian nation is still ahead of the US when it comes to research in 37 out of 44 crucial and emerging technologies, including AI, defense, and key quantum tech areas.
Insider reports that the Canberra-based Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) believes China has a "stunning lead" over the US when it comes to high-impact research across the majority of critical and emerging technology domains.
[...] The think tank notes that for some of these technologies, the ten leading research institutions are based in China and are collectively generating nine times more high-impact research papers than the second-ranked country, which is usually the US. What could be especially worrying for America is that two areas where China really excels are Defense and space-related technologies. ASPI writes that China's advancements in nuclear-capable hypersonic missiles took the US by surprise in 2021.
How is China so far ahead? Some of it is down to imported talent. The report notes that one-fifth of its high-impact papers are being authored by researchers with postgraduate training in a Five-Eyes country (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States). However, most of China's progress comes from deliberate design and long-term policy planning by President Xi Jinping and his predecessors.
The near-term effects of China's lead could see it gaining a stranglehold on the global supply of certain critical technologies, while the long-term impact could result in the authoritarian state gaining more global influence and power.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday March 06, @01:11AM (4 children)
Now, as I've said before, Marx is a natural-born critic. This means he's the bee's knees at pointing out what the problem is, but the pig's ear at providing a solution for it. So take the important points -- that *unfettered* (or un-/poorly-controlled) capitalism essentially eats itself to death and then dies choking on its own shit and vomit -- but come up with a solution that doesn't involve trying to bend the entirely of humanity around some pie-in-the-sky "wouldn't it be nice if" economic idea (communism).
No, the solution isn't communism or socialism, not because these can't work in theory, but because they can't work in practice. Most people are simply not high-minded enough to make it work. If people were angelic enough for communism to work, we'd be good enough for *any* economic system to work, including a complete and utter laissez-faire approach to economics. No, we have to work with what we have, and human nature being what it is, that means some form of capitalism. The solution is 1) sustainability (i.e., do capitalism in such a way that you can keep doing capitalism) and 2) remembering that capitalism is for humans, not humans for capitalism. More Norway, less USA, if you take my meaning.
So what does this have to do with China? Simple: for the last several decades, the US happily parasitized China and took advantage of its near-complete lack of environmental, financial, and human safeguards to get lots of cheap manufacturing done. Which means the manufacturing wasn't done here. Which means the capacity for manufacturing wasn't kept up -- after all, it's not lean and agile to have all that machinery and inventory sitting around unused, riiiiight? And like any parasitic organism in nature, the US became dependent on its host; like them, it lost the ability to do basic things for itself. When the host dies or moves on, what happens to the parasite?
Several years ago I wrote a journal about this exact subject, expanded to encompass imperial power as a whole, called Empires are Parasites, And Their Destiny is Decay [soylentnews.org]. This is what I'm talking about. People insist the US isn't an imperial power, but what else can it be called given our worldwide network of bases and our constant use (and abuse) of other countries for economic and financial advantage?
And the worst part is, all this did was make a few already wealthy people even more obscenely rich, at the cost of the entire middle class and the nation's political and noetic capital.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 06, @04:44AM
I guess we are laying the groundwork for the next species of existentialist chat bots to bullshit eachother about what it's all for and whether they're really real, until the Sun detonates.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday March 08, @07:43PM (2 children)
A trade hegemony. A bunch of military bases isn't that significant from an imperial point of view. You can project military power, but you don't hold territory. As to "constant use (and abuse) of other countries for economic and financial advantage"? That's standard country behavior.
I think the huge tell that US isn't an empire is that we stopped expanding territory back in the early 20th century when we relinquished the Philippines. For an empire, that's when the shark gets jumped since it's either expanding or decaying - so not expanding means it's decaying. But the US's peak power was actually a long stretch later after the Second World War.
I do not take your meaning. Norway has high resources going for it. Once their oil gets neutered by either regulation or depletion, they will be greatly less sustainable. The US's economy is more based on services and manufactured goods than natural resources. Those don't run out so easily.
As to remembering that capitalism is for humans, I also remember that high minded principles have a long history of backfiring when it comes to economics.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 11, @08:30PM (1 child)
Your religion is threatened once again.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday March 15, @05:14PM