Idle thought: Traditionally, campaigns of conquest were used as pressure valves, to give ambitious aggressive men something to do other than overthrow the government. But China is just way too big for this, especially compared to the size of the territories it might conquer.
If ambitious Chinese men get mad at the Xi Jinping regime in the wake of its crackdowns on business, there's no way Xi can say "Here, instead of getting mad at me, go conquer Taiwan and the little bits of India, Japan, and Vietnam that we claim." Those are just too small.
In the Cultural Revolution, ambitious young men sought glory in politics, by denouncing other people in order to work their way up the power structure ("China in Ten Words" is a great book about this).

But I'm pretty sure Xi doesn't want anything like that.
So if you're an ambitious young man in China right now, what do you *do*? How do you obtain glory?

Not sure Xi has thought this one through very carefully.

(end)

• • •

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

Keep Current with Noah Smith 🐇

Noah Smith 🐇 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 @Noahpinion

1 Oct
This is exactly right. If I were making the BBB bill, it would just be climate stuff, universal cash benefits, and investment in housing.

The fact that it's "a grab bag of popular things...done only partway" is a bit disappointing, TBH.

washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/…
I know this is cliche, but the Dems really are a grab bag of disparate special interests who throw all their policy ideas into one giant bill. This approach worked well in the New Deal because the scale of the crisis gave Dems the political capital to do many different things...
The grab-bag approach also worked in the 60s and 70s because the GOP was largely on board with the need to Do A Bunch of Stuff -- Nixon wanted to pass a bunch of programs so he could be as great as LBJ, etc.

That ended in the late 70s and 80s.
Read 9 tweets
30 Sep
I wish all the San Francisco people who love to cry crocodile tears as they remind us that we're living on Ohlone land would actually consider letting the Ohlone develop the land!!

theguardian.com/cities/2020/ja…
Squamish Nation is out here turning Vancouver into Solarpunk City, while San Francisco poops its pants over the thought of duplexes in the Richmond
About to write my post about how "Land Back is the true praxis of YIMBYism" and watch every communist in the Bay Area suffer spontaneous head-explodey
Read 4 tweets
30 Sep
MMT reminds me a lot of LaRouche
A Time of Unrest produces a general political energy that causes people to go in search of causes. During this time, many small cults arise that promise to give restless people the framework, purpose, and direction they seek.
My guess is that one sign that unrest has peaked is when these cults start trying to woo each other. It suggests that their individual growth has peaked and they're looking to merge, like companies in a mature industry.

jasonhickel.org/blog/2020/9/10…
Read 4 tweets
30 Sep
Me, 1999: Why does anyone call themselves a "fiscal conservative"?

Me, 2021: ...I see.
Basically I think America is an inherently liberal society where people who fear social change generally don't feel comfortable just saying "I fear social change", so they use fear of deficits as an excuse to block spending on actual change.
Meanwhile, crusading American liberals tend to become dissatisfied with the sort of ubiquitous grassroots cultural shifts that are their actual praxis of change, and demand big spending measures. When those are blocked by our kludgey system, they feel frustrated ("owned").
Read 5 tweets
29 Sep
The proposed benefits of less means-testing include:

* Popularity

* Avoidance of implicit taxation

* Administrative simplicity

If strict means testing is actually POPULAR, the first of these rationales goes out the window.
In addition, the seeming popularity of means-testing suggests that the suspicion and resentment that drive American politics are not aimed entirely at the poor.
The theory behind universality is that Americans don't like welfare because they imagine that it goes to undeserving poor people -- so if everyone gets the welfare, people will rest assured that their money isn't being redistributed to the undeserving poor.
Read 4 tweets
28 Sep
How many rich people go to community college? Come on.
Americans are obsessed with the idea that some other American is getting something they don't deserve. Universal resentment leading to an attitude of artificial scarcity.
We always talk about this in terms of White Republicans terrified of Black people being "welfare queens". And of course that's the biggest single piece of it. But Americans' resentment of each other goes far beyond that. It's kaleidoscopic. It's fractal. It's everywhere.
Read 4 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!

:(