Home
Search
Login
RegisterPosted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: March 09, 2026, 03:43:42 am »https://www.nbcnews.com/world/asia/us-china-running-world-together-china-says-no-thanks-rcna262278
This was the correct approach, an application of successional unipolarity as I explained previously:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/enemies/duginism/msg28598/?topicseen#msg28598
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/enemies/duginism/msg28609/?topicseen#msg28609
The US disrupted the expected line of succession outlined above by refusing to pass the pole to Japan following the end of the Cold War, instead pre-emptively using:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaza_Accord
to sabotage Japan. But if the US can now pass to China, at least the principle of successional unipolarity can be saved. Unfortunately, China is rejecting it. Back to the first link:
Duginist alert! An "equal and orderly multipolar world" is oxymoronic. That poles exist implies non-poles exist also, which already ensures inequality. That multipoles exist ensures disorder greater than with a unipole only.
Great power rivalry and bloc confrontation are literally what you get with a multipolar world, you moron! A pole is literally the same thing as a great power, and a bloc is the pole + the totality of its followers, therefore having more than one guarantees trouble.
Looking back in history?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pax_Sinica
Back to first link:
You know someone is incompetent when they talk while saying nothing.
On the contrary:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/news/iran/msg32306/#msg32306
But, as I said above, Wang is a Duginist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wang_Yi#Russia
Quote
The concept of a “G2” — a more exclusive version of the Group of Seven or Group of 20 forums — was introduced in 2005 by American economist C. Fred Bergsten to underscore the importance of communication between the world’s two biggest economies. Though it was initially embraced by some policymakers, the idea fell out of favor in Washington amid rising tensions with Beijing, including during Trump’s first term.
This was the correct approach, an application of successional unipolarity as I explained previously:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/enemies/duginism/msg28598/?topicseen#msg28598
Quote
One thing I can't stand is how many useful idiots have picked up the Duginist term multipolar world and now use it with positive connotations (thereby unwittingly serving Duginism). Back in the Counterculture era, the very notion of a multipolar world would have been considered both barbaric and hazardous. What we believed in back then was a unipolar world at any one time, with the pole being voluntarily passed from one country to another over time. Just as America took over from Britain, we were expecting Japan to take over from America, and then China to take over from Japan, and then India to take over from China, and so on. (Of course, the tacit understanding was that no Western country would ever be given the pole again.) To advocate for a multipolar world is to disrupt this orderly process of succession just described. (Homework: which civilization has the greatest selfish incentive to support a multipolar world?)
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/enemies/duginism/msg28609/?topicseen#msg28609
Quote
One pole at a time offers enough flexibility (compared to the same pole all the time) for a subsequent pole to address problems neglected or poorly handled by its predecessor. It allows each current pole country to voluntarily step down as soon it feels the next country is ready to step up, as opposed to trying to hold onto the pole for itself at any cost long after its prime has passed, and crashing catastrophically when it finally loses its grip. This should be the preference of all with sincere folkish intentions (ie. not Duginists).
I personally view the successional unipolar world as a product of hydraulic thinking. Initially one river supplies the most water, so we build canals from that river, and the main village on that river manages the water supply. But later we notice signs of the river drying up, so we reroute the canals to an adjacent river, whereupon of course a different village (surely one on this new river) should now manage the water supply.
The US disrupted the expected line of succession outlined above by refusing to pass the pole to Japan following the end of the Cold War, instead pre-emptively using:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaza_Accord
to sabotage Japan. But if the US can now pass to China, at least the principle of successional unipolarity can be saved. Unfortunately, China is rejecting it. Back to the first link:
Quote
Wang said China will “never seek hegemony or expansion” and that it wants to build “an equal and orderly multipolar world.”
Duginist alert! An "equal and orderly multipolar world" is oxymoronic. That poles exist implies non-poles exist also, which already ensures inequality. That multipoles exist ensures disorder greater than with a unipole only.
Quote
“Looking back in history, great power rivalry and bloc confrontation have invariably inflicted disaster and pain on humanity,” he said.
Great power rivalry and bloc confrontation are literally what you get with a multipolar world, you moron! A pole is literally the same thing as a great power, and a bloc is the pole + the totality of its followers, therefore having more than one guarantees trouble.
Looking back in history?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pax_Sinica
Quote
Pax Sinica (Latin for "Chinese peace"; traditional Chinese: 中華治世; simplified Chinese: 中华治世; pinyin: Zhōnghuá Zhìshì) is a historiographical term referring to periods of peace and stability in East Asia,[1] Northeast Asia,[2] Southeast Asia,[1] and Central Asia[3] led by China. A study on the Sinocentric world system reveals that the multiple periods of Pax Sinica, when taken together, amounted to a length of approximately two thousand years.[4]
Back to first link:
Quote
“The agenda of high-level exchanges is already on the table,” he said. “What the two sides need to do now is to make thorough preparations accordingly, create a suitable environment, manage the risks that do exist and remove unnecessary disruptions.”
You know someone is incompetent when they talk while saying nothing.
Quote
Wang reiterated Beijing’s calls for an immediate halt to military action and a return to dialogue, saying the war with Iran “does no one any good.”
On the contrary:
https://trueleft.createaforum.com/news/iran/msg32306/#msg32306
But, as I said above, Wang is a Duginist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wang_Yi#Russia
Quote
In his 2022 meeting with Wang at the SCO, Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov attended praised the "traditional friendship" between Russia and China.[19] Wang reaffirmed support for Russia, saying that China will "firmly support Russia, under the leadership of President Putin … to further establish Russia's status as a major power on the international stage".[78]
...
In December 2022, Wang defended China's position on the Russo-Ukrainian War and said that China would "deepen strategic mutual trust and mutually beneficial cooperation" with Russia".[79]
Wang and Xi at the 16th BRICS summit in Kazan, Russia, 22 October 2024
In February 2023, Wang announced his peace initiative for the Russian invasion of Ukraine at the 59th Munich Security Conference.[80]
...
While the plan attracted support from Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said that the plan "doesn't have much credibility because [the Chinese] have not been able to condemn the illegal invasion of Ukraine."[82]
...
In July 2025 Wang Yi allegedly told European diplomats in an unofficial meeting that China does not want Russia to lose the war in Ukraine.[85][86]
