Conception of state theory. ImageImageImageImage
All state formation are that hodge podge of elite necessity and randomness of events. The Germany of post 1870 sought equilibrium regionally, integration internally, and markets externally. Yet by the 1870's Germany was full of continental awareness. To get to Asia Germans...
Had to travel first through the US by way of the Trans Pacific railroad this gave German theorists a number of ideas such as how connecting infrastructure connects sovereignty, and encloses distance to a living frame and thus national identity. So this continental model was...
In mind as they traveled to Asia particularly to China and Russia saw a more dilapidated moebius. Yet they also saw the numerous 'other continents' of Europe's colonial empires sprawling throughout and became convinced that any successful futurism would need to be vast in scale.
This was married to the idea of biological space as German fertility seem to be in excess of viable environs yet colonial relocation was a hard failure since none of Germany's colonies had wealth or livability to offer. This together with the overall geopolitical environment...
Of permanent French fear/angst a continent seeming to about to fall on top of Europe (Russia) yet with a Europe divided in too numerous powers to create an effective bloc (only 1945 would deliver that) Germany sought growth, a growth at the mercy of the Royal British navy...
This fear of Germany's superior internal success in terms of governmental/industrial/scientific/economic efficiencies still mark how the UK, France, Russia still view Germany even today.
Germany feeling unable to safely grow itself by way of international trade- colonies set out a naval build up that lead to a British counter reaction and eventual war in 1914. Wiemar Germany was floating between a European solution to it's woes or a national explosion to over...
whelm it's woes rather then negotiate with them. This later mode gave a sense of control and sovereignty and thus face and credibility. Germany would have to do more, sacrifice more, go faster, go harder to reclaim 1913 and put a calm to the future. Extreme politics result.
Land powers produced a certain type of polity as sea powers also produce a unique polity. All international laws are based on attempts at spatial normalization/legitimacy, the powers of the great spaces produce today's world order moving from the European continent towards...
The great spaces of the Soviet Union and the United States as they struggle to produce a new international law and thus a new Nomos of the Earth.
Early Meiji Japan attempting to bring into being a modern state into being conceptualized this by the 1880's as one based in empire as this was the case with all of Europe's major powers. The Japanese army modeled itself on Prussia and the Japanese navy on the UK.
Japan based it's constitution on the Prussian constitution and thus instituted Oligarchic/bureaucratic/military rule under the figurehead of the Emperor rather then parliament being sovereign. By the 1920's most of the oligarchics (Genro) were dead leaving bureaucracy/military
as the de-facto rulers, this however came to ahead in the 1920's when political parties were able to gain enough popular support to briefly usher in Democracy, til the military and the new emperor Showa watered down parliament in favor of the military/emperor system. It would
be this system that would lead to the militarization of the 1930's and Japan's multiple wars eventually leading to war with the US in 1941.
Post 1945 Japan was geoeconomics a seeming turn towards geopolitics that never was in the 1980's, the vague internationalism of the 1990's (largely the product of domestic instability), 2000's-2010 attempt at revitalizing, 2010-2020 move towards geopolitics.
State Theory II: ImageImageImageImage
Land and sea states produces their own particular politics with land (particularly land-lock) countries tending towards isolation and xenophobia and autocratic politics whilst sea states (at least in their ports) tend to be more liberal, cosmopolitan, global trade oriented.
For while continental powers may differ in their politics (Russia's seas are largely frozen year round, China has sea access only to it's East, whilst the US obstinately has "two liberal coasts") all have the same issue of core vs periphery or over which region actual rules.
Whilst China and Russia have attempted to solve this question by centralization power and having a hierarchy top down autocratic system the US has attempted to use it's scale to diffuse possible faction (Federalist No. 10), yet the US may be entering a problem experienced by
Charles V vast holding's that it may not be so much space that is hard to govern but the dissimilar yet contemporaneous forms and folds of politics/time occurring in those spaces. Charles V attempted to solve this problem by territorial amputation and a quasi two emperor system.
Whilst US changes instead of actual replacing past forms/folds are being forced together where there is seemingly no give to take. This differs the US greatly from Europe who largely and collectively abandoned and replaced certain forms (Christianity being largely replaced with
secular humanism, social conservatism being replaced with social liberalism save for immigration, social democratic economy being the norm) whilst in the US these forms did not disappear or were simply replaced but still live on simultaneously yet are now cloister away.
It is the Blue states that act as de-facto buffer to interior Red America the former being the internationalist vs ladder's nativism. The blue is where the tech is and the red is where the fertility is, the first satisfy a certain present-ism the 2nd the long term viability
of the nation itself. Cantor shows that even the dead Middle Ages can once again be given life if given in the form of present-ism by it's authors. Thus 1920's-1930's German work on the period takes on a nationalist hue despite no Germany actually existing during the period.
The Middle Ages thus moves from a severe religious, royal, proto-state pool into the first mimicry of the nation.
John Hays a statesmen without being a politician, academic, bureaucrat wielded the US through to Panama Canal and the Alaska-Canadian boundary by WASP certainty and literary timing while the US may not still had Great power politics it now had a great power yardstick of a man.
State Theory III: A tale of 2 books. "The Third Century: America's Resurgence in the Asian Era" By Joel Kotkin & Yoriko Kishimoto, 1988. "Dominion from Sea to Sea: Pacific Ascendancy and American Power" By Bruce Cumings, 2009. ImageImage
Joel Kotkin (1952-) American professor of Urban studies, Geographer, demographer. Bruce Cumings (1943-) American Historian of East Asia. ImageImage
Both men have spent decades writing on America's relationship with Asia in their respective fields which when read together gives a fuller tilt towards conception of the US having reserve, Rejuvenating, & resilient powers or as Kotkin puts it, It's "sokojikara".
According to Cumings California only become economically self sufficient after WW2 when the government pushed through a mass industrialization that continued well into the Cold War. Similarly WW2 is when Seattle becomes the US's air-hub continuing well into the Vietnam War...
Post-Vietnam Seattle shifted to a more civilian air hub for Boeing. By the 1970's the US relationship with Asia more broadly changes from a high security focus to a more economic orientation. Yet American investment into Asia according to Kotkin remained backwards due to the..
US businesses community's Eurocentirsm, racial biases despite the fact that by the 1980's Asia held immense market potential in comparison to Western Europe's shrinking bust. Plenty of businesses leaders & government officials in Asia selfsame saw vast potential in the US...
Market compared to Western Europe's. The Japanese businessmen themselves thought that their own domestic market was already tapped out due to Japan's limited space & few resources & thus they looked for continental scale or Tairku in the US since China was still backwards and...
Western Europe's stagnant market & protectionism meant any potential there was quite limited. Numerous businessmen & government officials from Asia also noted the youth, diversity & size of the US left it as Nathan Glazer Harvard sociologist put it an "Unfinished Country". Ripe..
With opportunities, which in an older & more established state would actual flip these same stimulus's to chaos, instability, & the breakdown of the state. By the 1980's the push & pull of Asia between cooperation & competition could be seen throughout both Asia & the US...
Japanese manufacturing was seemingly destroying much of the US's auto industries & also competing heavily with Silicon Valley in the realm of electronics. Simultaneously however Japanese investment in the US was growing rapidly, US trade & investment in South Korea was also both
board & deep with the US in the mid 80's being the source for 40% of South Korean exports & 50% of FDI. Taiwan as well was enjoying deepening economic/tech interlinking with the US economy/tech sector in terms of increasing electronic manufacturing for US companies. It may well
be that by the 1980's the US had already produced it's future orientation. It was here particularly in East Asia where the future of the US economy would be chiefly intertwined (Tech/Electronic manufacturing) not Europe. It was Asia after all where the future markets would be...
On the one hand Japan was quite submissive to the US (on security matters) yet on the other it was totally ruthless (in economic competition with the US), this push/pull would only stabilize by the 1990's with Japan's economy slowing down & the US's booming. Broadly speaking...
By the 1980's-2000's Taiwan, Japan had essentially economically integrated itself with the US (with mutual dependencies) while South Korea & China largely competed with this nexus as for instance South Korea saw Japan as it's main competitor & both the US & China as potential...
Blocs to sell too & thus was keen not to integrate too closely with the US. By the 2010's however this began to shift somewhat As South Korea wished to diffuse some of it's reliance on an unpredictable China by moving some of it's production to the US & keep the US steadfast on
Security matters on the Peninsula with an increasingly antagonistic North Korea & China. By 2016-2020 the US has attempted to nudge Japan, Taiwan, & the US into a more formal & solid security/tech nexus in response to China's rise. South Korea has so far been hesitate to join up
Due to it's strong economic need for China & wish to utilize better relations with China who could then use it's influence to help pacify North Korean aggression. Ultimately I doubt South Korea will align with Beijing since as long as it supports the North Korean regime it...
will not feel safe, particularly it's leadership. If the US were to leave it is quite likely that the North would attack since lacking economic, cultural, & now nationalist heft would only have a military card to play. It is highly doubtful China would go to war with the North
to stop it, or have the level of influence to stop a North Korean invasion from happening since to the North such an invasion is itself an act of regime survival. In such a scenario the South Korean elite can expect a Katyn on the Han river. The National would be the personal in
South Korea. In sum if the main economic umbilical cord of the US is shifting from the Atlantic to the Pacific it is still an ongoing processes with competing nexuses of China's still developing cord & of the older push/pull dynamic of a now global ordering.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Carlos Irizarry

Carlos Irizarry Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @GoyaGokou

13 Sep
Never Trumper Republicans were nearly 100% of representatives of conservatives on the MSM yet only made up only 5-10% of actual GOP voters since Trump gained & maintained 90% support rates throughout his presidency.
The truth may be that the Never Trumper elite are too de-legitimized to regain power. This happened first with the W Bush years which they hitched they horses on & supported only to thrown over a steep cliff by the end of it. Knowing they had nothing new to offer they jumped..
by & large on the tea party train despite the fact that the rank & file members hated how burnt they felt by supporting Bush & these same elites. The vast majority of the Never Trump elite did nothing to stop the growing extremism in the party since they had no cache with them..
Read 7 tweets
21 Dec 20
In essence Country today descend from the learning of the past. For the US 1776 is year 0. It was this America seeped in British political/philosophical/legal/Cultural/Economic thinking and ways. French influences outside Montesquieu and French literature was minor.
This America was insular in a way not so unlike Japan, it took bits and pieces from Europe afterwards (The Revolutionary War and War of 1812 closed the UK off in a deep sense, while the French Revolution, Napoleon, Monarchy again held little sway in the US.
This America was insular in a way not so unlike Japan, it took bits and pieces from Europe afterwards (The Revolutionary War and War of 1812 closed the UK off in a deep sense, while the French Revolution, Napoleon, Monarchy again held little sway in the US.
Read 11 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(