Deglobalization

Any political discussion should go here. This subforum will be moderated differently than other forums.
Forum rules
1.) No personal threats.
2.) No doxxing/revealing personal information.
3.) No spam.
4.) No circumventing press restrictions.
5.) No racism, sexism, homophobia, or derogatory posts.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
flash2015
Gold Donator
Gold Donator
Posts: 3200
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:55 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Karma: 1155
Contact:

Deglobalization

#1 Post by flash2015 » Thu Feb 09, 2023 10:14 pm

Just curious - anyone watched videos/read books by Peter Zeihan? An example of his spiel is here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UA-jOLF2T4c

Due to a variety of factors (demographics, the war in Ukraine, where the arable farmland is which doesn't require fertilizers, which countries have a lot of natural resources etc.) the world is gradually going to deglobalize. Out of this will be winners and losers.

Short answer on the losers - Russia's f*****, China's f*****, Germany and central Europe f*****. The US and Mexico will do OK, Australia will do OK, Canada not as good, same with other countries in Western Europe.

I only found this stuff a few days ago. Just wondering if anyone else has done a deeper dive.

User avatar
orathaic
Bronze Donator
Bronze Donator
Posts: 1537
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 3:20 pm
Karma: 394
Contact:

Re: Deglobalization

#2 Post by orathaic » Fri Feb 10, 2023 8:57 pm

Have been paying some attention to him on Youtube, am not convinced by most of his arguments, too much to be lost be deglobalizing, having security cooperation between the likes of India, Japan, Vietnam, South Korea, Taiwan, Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore - if they can't organise with the Australians to make sure their own waters are safe for trade to transit all of their economies will suffer greatly.


Which may be a great solution for global warming, a massive global recession... But we want more efficient growth - how to produce more with less - not less productivity.

Maybe other trade routes will be at risk, India to Egypt? the Mediterranean should be secure. Transatlantic trade? Who is there to disrupt that? But India to Egypt has Iranian influence who are currently being sanctioned out of the global economy and have nothing to lose from shutting down oil exports from the gulf... I don't know, i feel being willing to take the concerns of the local powers (Turkey, Egpyt, Iran and Pakistan in this case) on board, and come to a mutually beneficial arrangement is far more likely than all global trade to be borked.

Even if it means a tarrif on goods passing through certain waters - like the one which Egypt has on the Suez Canal...

User avatar
flash2015
Gold Donator
Gold Donator
Posts: 3200
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:55 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Karma: 1155
Contact:

Re: Deglobalization

#3 Post by flash2015 » Sun Feb 12, 2023 7:53 pm

There is lots to what he is suggesting...this is just one small point.

In his latest book (I am right on the page now), his example of the US keeping international shipping open is from the Iran-Iraq War. In 1983, Iran and Iraq were flinging missiles at each other's ships (300 ships were hit). He argues that this almost destroyed the global insurance sector. Reagan's actions to (1) Escort all non-Iranian shipping (b) Reflag all ships as US vessels (3) Provide a blanket sovereign indemnity stopped a meltdown.

IThe US could do this easily because for several decades from 1970 to 2015 the US almost always had a carrier group in the area. It doesn't anymore. Of course, just like the reasons for the Iraq War, there was a lot of US self-interest involved in keeping the carrier group there. The US was dependent on middle east oil just like most of the rest of the world. Since the shale revolution which started in the mid-naughties, this is no longer true. It could largely be self-sufficient for oil (the main issue currently is a disconnect in refinery capacity).

If Iran-Saudi Arabia heated up to war and the US didn't want to get involved as it has its own oil, who could intervene to fill in the gap? No other country comes even remotely close to the power of the US navy. In general the US is also the country least reliant on global trade by a very long way (I have seen this in his videos - haven't got up to this specific point in the book yet).

The US is very interested in Taiwan and Asia because of how crucial the chip supply lines are. The US is actively working to bring those and other supply lines home to North America. So again it won't be as crucial in the future for it to care about defending Taiwan/Japan/South Korea.

Of course he talks a lot of worst case and he enjoys hyperbole but I find it interesting the perspective he brings to the table.

User avatar
orathaic
Bronze Donator
Bronze Donator
Posts: 1537
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 3:20 pm
Karma: 394
Contact:

Re: Deglobalization

#4 Post by orathaic » Sun Feb 12, 2023 9:51 pm

Of course, and the issue with middle Eastern oil is that so many countries are dependent on it, probably more so since the Russian oil has been sanctioned.

But the fact that Russian energy exports has become so unreliable is kick to the planners of economies all over, trying to push a green agenda, or an energy security adgenda, it doesn't matter they are largely both aligned right now.

So the responce may involve an increase in security spending (already happening due to the aforementioned Russian invasion) and moves towards energy independence (which is fairly rare for those countries which aren't net exporters of fossil fuels... I mean, i suspect there are net exporters of Uranium who aren't energy independent, but make France as free from middle Eastern oil as they can be).

But yes, i agree his perspective is fairly interesting. I saw him discuss Saudi Oil production, and how it is probably all lies, along with their total reserves.

And Russian ba Chinese demographics, and how both are declining populations (though Russia has many ethnic minorities who have 'healthy' young populations... China i suspect is in a not too dissimilar position, but treats their ethnic minorities far worse... But i could be wrong about that). The US and European demographics are interesting... How economies are going to adapt to retiring 'Boomers' and the various age of retirements and changes in fertility rate.

Crazy Anglican
Posts: 310
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2017 12:04 am
Karma: 285
Contact:

Re: Deglobalization

#5 Post by Crazy Anglican » Tue Feb 14, 2023 1:38 am

I have seen a bit from him on YouTube, but have not read any of his books yet. My initial take is that he seems to paint a bit of a rosy picture for the USA. He's totally turned 180 degrees on Ukraine (like the rest of us, he thought the resistance would be short lived and Russia would win even if not quickly). He does seem to announce the complete collapse of the PRC with regularity, but it doesn't seem to have happened yet.
1

User avatar
flash2015
Gold Donator
Gold Donator
Posts: 3200
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:55 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Karma: 1155
Contact:

Re: Deglobalization

#6 Post by flash2015 » Tue Feb 14, 2023 8:08 pm

Crazy Anglican wrote:
Tue Feb 14, 2023 1:38 am
I have seen a bit from him on YouTube, but have not read any of his books yet. My initial take is that he seems to paint a bit of a rosy picture for the USA. He's totally turned 180 degrees on Ukraine (like the rest of us, he thought the resistance would be short lived and Russia would win even if not quickly). He does seem to announce the complete collapse of the PRC with regularity, but it doesn't seem to have happened yet.
I haven't seen his videos before the war started so I don't know exactly what he said then. Russia could have easily won early on. Ukraine was very lucky. If the Battle for Hostomel Airport had gone differently and Russia had been able to land troops and supplies there Kyiv may have fallen very quickly (the US allegedly gave Ukraine the intelligence about this battle plan). If Zelenskyy had decided to do a runner as the US had offered him (Zelenskyy could have had a very comfortable life in exile), I suspect Ukraine would have easily fallen too.

I can understand the skepticism about claims of a coming collapse of the PRC. There have been these sort of claims in the West since the 80s, that opening up China would inevitably lead to the end of the communist party. So far that hasn't turned out to be true at all.

However he is making a few specific reasons for his claim of an eventual fall of China:

(1) Demographics - it is only going to start to really bite this decade. A few years ago we found that it was EVEN worse than initially thought (100M missing, all young people). I assume this is one of his sources: https://www.scmp.com/news/china/economy ... icial-mark

(2) The general breakdown of globalization that he believes is coming (which also relies on demographic issues biting in other countries soon too) - China is heavily dependent on imports of basic foodstuffs etc. where the US can be pretty much self-sufficient

(3) Xi Jinping has set himself up as president for life. For the past decade has primarily been concerned with purging anyone who remotely can challenge him (similar issues exist in Russia with Putin). So he is surrounded by "Yes men" who likely won't give him accurate info of the depths of the problems. Also the bench of bright people just isn't there with ideas to help China dig out of the hole they are slowly falling into.

Crazy Anglican
Posts: 310
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2017 12:04 am
Karma: 285
Contact:

Re: Deglobalization

#7 Post by Crazy Anglican » Tue Feb 14, 2023 10:29 pm

Actually, I have to take that back. I just saw a video from him yesterday. He has been pretty consistently saying that Russia will eventually win against Ukraine. His whole take on Russia's expansionism is that they need to expand to take over the nine traditional avenues for conquest of Russia. It is essentially the only way they can be secure as a nation. They also know that they really have to do it right now, or they will likely lack the youth to fight a war to do so. He believes that Ukraine is only one of the pieces of the puzzle, and they will have to push on into Moldova and Poland.

User avatar
flash2015
Gold Donator
Gold Donator
Posts: 3200
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:55 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Karma: 1155
Contact:

Re: Deglobalization

#8 Post by flash2015 » Tue Feb 14, 2023 10:46 pm

Do you have a link? I hadn't been getting that impression

User avatar
orathaic
Bronze Donator
Bronze Donator
Posts: 1537
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 3:20 pm
Karma: 394
Contact:

Re: Deglobalization

#9 Post by orathaic » Tue Feb 14, 2023 11:05 pm

Crazy Anglican wrote:
Tue Feb 14, 2023 10:29 pm
Actually, I have to take that back. I just saw a video from him yesterday. He has been pretty consistently saying that Russia will eventually win against Ukraine. His whole take on Russia's expansionism is that they need to expand to take over the nine traditional avenues for conquest of Russia. It is essentially the only way they can be secure as a nation. They also know that they really have to do it right now, or they will likely lack the youth to fight a war to do so. He believes that Ukraine is only one of the pieces of the puzzle, and they will have to push on into Moldova and Poland.
I haven't seen him discuss that in months... So maybe it wasn't a recent video?

Crazy Anglican
Posts: 310
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2017 12:04 am
Karma: 285
Contact:

Re: Deglobalization

#10 Post by Crazy Anglican » Tue Feb 14, 2023 11:29 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRF4uccV6to

Yes, I thought it was more recent than it is. Six months old.
1

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Esquire Bertissimmo, Google [Bot] and 76 guests