The idea that manufacturing/supply-chains/western firms will leave China en-masse and thus spark a rout in living standards, geopolitical power and political unity, leaving China humbled and contrite, is a wet dream that's been rehashed oh-so often these past 10-15 years. First it was to be a symptom of the GFC, then Trump's trade war, then the virus now, according to you, apparently additive manufacturing and national security will bring about its doom. Easy to dismiss out of hand but, never say never I suppose.
Your rationale is quite....optimistic to say the least. And the idea that we are merely a decade or 2 away from large-scale 3d-printing that is going to eliminate the need for capex, supply chains and network clusters takes the cake! The direction of movement isnt even in-line with this type of thinking: most national industrial policies, all different versions of Industry 4.0, call for solutions demanding greater aggregation. Not less. You would need a next-level exogenous shock to catalyze.
May I suggest a more culturally nuanced interpretation of Mr. Xi's words?
"In address after address, Xi teaches that the arc of history bends towards “multi-polarization,” “globalization,” and “peaceful development.” Each faces its own obstacles (in Maoist fashion, he describes these obstacles as “contradictions” linked to the productive forces that create the trends themselves) but those obstacles cannot overturn the general trend”.
The arc of Chinese history has been bent that way by expectations, mostly Confucian, for 2500 years. It's fully bent.
Our Roman expectation has been to destroy true multi-polarization, globalization, and peaceful development wherever we find them, lest they threaten our hegemony. We've been like that for 2500 years.
As for using 'contradictions' rather than 'obstacles,' I vote for the former since once you see an obstacle as a mere contradiction, you can set to work resolving it. Which the Chinese are very good at.
Q: "If you can source energy from the sun or wind, store it locally, and then use it for more or less everything then what is the rationale for energy supply chains spanning across the globe?"
A: If the Balkans can buy it at 4¢ per kWh from sunny Greece they'll provide their own base load local and buy the rest from Athens.
To that end, China has spent $160 billion constructing GEIDCO, the global energy interconnect company that hooks up national grids to each other with UHV cables and monstrous switchgear. It transfers energy from nation to nation with the sun. It has offices in 60 countries and new hookups every day.
The idea that manufacturing/supply-chains/western firms will leave China en-masse and thus spark a rout in living standards, geopolitical power and political unity, leaving China humbled and contrite, is a wet dream that's been rehashed oh-so often these past 10-15 years. First it was to be a symptom of the GFC, then Trump's trade war, then the virus now, according to you, apparently additive manufacturing and national security will bring about its doom. Easy to dismiss out of hand but, never say never I suppose.
Your rationale is quite....optimistic to say the least. And the idea that we are merely a decade or 2 away from large-scale 3d-printing that is going to eliminate the need for capex, supply chains and network clusters takes the cake! The direction of movement isnt even in-line with this type of thinking: most national industrial policies, all different versions of Industry 4.0, call for solutions demanding greater aggregation. Not less. You would need a next-level exogenous shock to catalyze.
May I suggest a more culturally nuanced interpretation of Mr. Xi's words?
"In address after address, Xi teaches that the arc of history bends towards “multi-polarization,” “globalization,” and “peaceful development.” Each faces its own obstacles (in Maoist fashion, he describes these obstacles as “contradictions” linked to the productive forces that create the trends themselves) but those obstacles cannot overturn the general trend”.
The arc of Chinese history has been bent that way by expectations, mostly Confucian, for 2500 years. It's fully bent.
Our Roman expectation has been to destroy true multi-polarization, globalization, and peaceful development wherever we find them, lest they threaten our hegemony. We've been like that for 2500 years.
As for using 'contradictions' rather than 'obstacles,' I vote for the former since once you see an obstacle as a mere contradiction, you can set to work resolving it. Which the Chinese are very good at.
Q: "If you can source energy from the sun or wind, store it locally, and then use it for more or less everything then what is the rationale for energy supply chains spanning across the globe?"
A: If the Balkans can buy it at 4¢ per kWh from sunny Greece they'll provide their own base load local and buy the rest from Athens.
To that end, China has spent $160 billion constructing GEIDCO, the global energy interconnect company that hooks up national grids to each other with UHV cables and monstrous switchgear. It transfers energy from nation to nation with the sun. It has offices in 60 countries and new hookups every day.
China is non-Texas.