Why aren’t you replying now ?
Would not take too much notice of that report.
The fields mentioned (Nanomaterials and Synthetic biology) China is well behind. For nanomaterials Japan by some distance is leading the way. For a material like Nanocellulose about 20 products have been commercialised 15 by Japanese companies, the rest in the US and Canada.
In Synthetic Biology the US far outstrips anyone. All the biggest companies are in the US (Ginkgo Bioworks, Lazatech, Amyris) . Ginkgo BioWorks alone is worth something like 25 bn and uses a third of the DNA synthesised.
If you were to list the top 10 scientists in the field of synthetic biology they would be American, European, and Korean. Cant think of a single Chinese synthetic biologist of any note.
Good practical example. Take a related field like vaccine development. China could manufacture a vaccine but in terms of world order they were well behind US/UK/Germany and Switzerland.
1 Like
Don’t shoot the messenger. It’s a thorough study by an Australian thinktank. I don’t know whether having brilliant individuals is the same as being ahead.
It does mention US advantage in vaccines.
I fully expect China to be the worlds dominant top dog in the coming years.
America has been staving it off by investing so much in its military, but you get the sense that America is hollow, and past its peak, while China is on the rise.
For all the problems America has, it is still streets ahead of China in terms of rights and freedoms and so on. But the hunger and desire isn’t there to the same degree, or indeed the concept of a societal greater good, which is why I think China will be the clear leader in most metrics in the coming years.
Read about the middle income trap. China are already well into the problems the theory predicts for their ability to keep growing. Give it another 20 years (I think) and both India and Nigeria will be projected to have passed it in terms of population.
Possibly, we’ll see top dogs in different areas. China is already the new economical monster, but whom from the outside would want to live there? Not many I guess, their state dicatorship isn’t attractive at all.
The US will likely stay the military top dog for a while, but don’t deserve to bear the flag of defenders of human rights anymore. They have misused that tag far too often, and are about to throw away everything in that regard internally, as they are heading straight towards a new form of fascism. For a lot of people, they have lost the appeal they once had.
That leaves us with Europe (Russia excepted, as it has turned back into a dictatorship again). Europe holds the most appeal for people coming from Africa, the Middle East or Asia wanting to start a new life, and rightly so. It’s economic power is immense, but in many ways, it’s a sleeping giant, far too dependent on the US imo. I wonder if we’ll see a strong and united Europe rising at some point (much work needed though). The US won’t want that of course, as we have become their playing ground since the end of WW2, so either they’ll remember at some point that democracy and individual freedom has been their strongest asset during the twentieth century, and come back to that, and we’ll continue to do business for mutual benefit. Or they’ll become a dictatorship themselves, and we’ll hopefully part ways at some point.
1 Like
Generally, the most important factor is economic wealth. With that, military, technological and diplomatic power can be bought. Expect China to become the dominant world power in the next two decades.
The importance of the collapse of the democratic consensus in the US cannot be overstated. Europe is not united enough to protect democracy alone and has its own anti democratic forces to deal with.
I fear that the stable, liberal democratic societies that most in the West have enjoyed since the second world war will soon be a thing of the past. Those of us who have been lucky enough to live in them should fight for those values for our children, but the writing is clearly on the wall. I appreciate that these freedoms and comforts have been at the expense of many people living in less prosperous countries, but their lot will not improve as the world falls under the shadow of dictatorship.
1 Like
Just to play devils advocate. Surely there is a middle ground between the liberal democracy where most thing goes of the West and the other extreme of Russia, China and North Korea? It might not be the worst situation for future generations where there is a realistic calibration of political, governmental and societal systems and our children can live in a free world but yet safer and prosperous. These things do not have to be polar opposites.
There is nothing about liberal democracy that means that the West should control the world economy (if that’s what you mean).
Democracy doesn’t have geographical boundaries any more than fascism, communism or any other form of government. It is just an accident of history that it has taken hold first in Europe and then in the US.
I appreciate your desire for equilibrium and harmony, but unfortunately, dictatorships can’t accept liberty on their doorsteps. It’s too much of a threat to those in power if their citizens see their neighbours enjoying freedoms that they are denied. That’s what’s happening in the Ukraine right now. Democracies are also uncomfortable co-existing alongside repressive regimes. The idea of some kind of compromise is wishful thinking in my opinion. It may work to a degree in Singapore, but on a global scale it would be impossible.
1 Like
the size of Singapore makes something like that feasible. You cannot have that form of government for a larger country.
1 Like
I partly agree but It’s not as if China doesn’t have problems of their own as well. Their credibility in the international market has taken a huge beating after their zero covid nonsense and their heavy handed approach to 3rd world countries trapping them in a huge cyclic debt.
1 Like
I’m not a huge fan of the world bank and the IMF but the issues are the interest rates. The World Bank and the IMF give loans at much more sustainable basis than the Chinese government. If anything, The IMF loans are 0 percent interest rate for low income countries.
As far as chinese loans to Pakistan are concerned , these are short term loans with a very high interest rate. Loans by France and Germany for instance are long term loans with comparitively smaller interest rate (0.25-0.5%). The chinese loans range from (1 to 3%) which are business loans.
Failure to repay those loans often results in Pakistan or Srilanka for that matter leasing their land out to China etc. It’s one thing giving a country loan to sustain itself, It’s another thing giving them loans knowing that they can’t repay and use that as a collateral to take over land/minerals/gas etc etc.
2 Likes
The world has forgot this cunt. Up there with Pinochet and Suharto.
3 Likes