The Russian demographics have declined for nearly half a century due to instability in Russia in the 1990s and the collapse of the Russian higher educational system, particularly in technology and engineering fields in the mid-1980s.
Furthermore, in the 1990s, in the aftermath of the Cold War from 1945 to 1989, the collapse of the Soviet Union regime in Russia in 1990 gave Russia a decade of instability and internal wars, which reduced the chances of its young people having children.
People don’t have kids if they don’t feel safe or are concerned about the economy.
A great example is Japan, whose population has not been at a replacement level since the late 1970s due to the impact of the 1973 oil crisis.
The 1970s oil crisis was caused primarily due to the October Yon Kippur War in 1973, which was the fourth Arab-Israeli war. In response to this, Arab nations want to hurt Israel and other countries, particularly the United States and its allies that support the world’s only Jewish state.
The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting (Opec) reduced oil output by half by early 1974.
On October 17, OPEC announced rolling monthly 5 per cent reductions in oil production, halving it within six months. The result was a quadrupling of prices within a year and the first oil crisis.
When there is a crisis or the perception of a crisis, people tend not to have children or have much fewer than when times are good.
Why Russia Might Lose the Far East to China
This is all relevant to why Russia has a strong chance of losing the Far East because its current population of around 140 million is in decline, and the bulk of its population is in the West.
In comparison, its far eastern population is around 6.4 million. The Chinese have a population of approximately 1.4 billion and are heavily settling into the Russian region, using its population to break away Russia’s far east from greater Russia.
Furthermore, the Chinese have used this strategy to integrate the Tibetan region and Xinjiang region into greater China by turning the ethnic Han Chinese into the majority within those regions and making the previous majority the minority to ensure that China will rule those regions.
Furthermore, according to the Chinese Communist Party, which has some basis in truth, China suffered 100 years of humiliation from 1839 to 1949, and this is why the Chinese Communist Party’s attempt to reunite Greater China and settle scores from that period.
The Russian Empire conquered parts of greater Manchuria, which the Chinese wanted back there, doing this through their massive population immigrating into the Far East.
America is going through a drastic change in its demographics, which means that ethnic groups and cultural groups that make up the population of the United States are not based on racial lines but purely cultural.
When it comes to race relations, which is purely a human-made concept, it has no jurisdiction in reality; when I discuss different cultures, I’m not talking about a person’s skin colour, merely the cultural and political traditions which they come from.
This can even be purely where their interests lie; for example, the Latin American group of the American population may very well dominate American political and cultural life by the end of the century.
What this means in practical terms depends on how well they assimilated with the United States.
With the USA’s record, it has a fantastic track record of turning people from different nations into Americans no matter where they come from.
The demographics of America, in regards to the white majority, particularly from Western Europe, will become a minority by 2045.
Therefore, the new dominant or rising dominant Latino minorities will have very little interest in supporting the state of Israel as well as the rest of America because the United States no longer need to rely on oil from the Middle East, which increases the United States driven by his domestic politics no longer being interested geopolitically and socially in the region.
The Jewish population within the United States is around 2.4%, around 7.6 million people. This is a minority that continues to get smaller and grow increasingly marginalised as new ethnic groups begin to dominate America’s political culture.
In democracies, policymakers are elected to office by their constituents. Basically, it is the voters who decide the makeup of a democratic nation’s foreign policy and its decision-making.
Greatest Generation: Declining Support for Israel from the United States
America’s Generational Divide
The reason why different generations have different political viewpoints is due to the periods they grew up in and the information and different technologies they were exposed to.
Most people form their political and ideological viewpoints and have seen the world within their first decade of working.
The Silent Generation, also known as Radio Babies or Traditionalists, includes people who were born between 1928 and 1945 and lived through World War II and the Great Depression, according to FamilySearch.
These challenging experiences shaped many of the generation’s attitudes toward the workplace.
Now, we have the generation that built our world political order and kept the peace for over 78 years.
The Greatest Generation, also called the World War II Generation and G.I. Generation, was a generation of Americans born between approximately 1901 and 1924 who came of age during the Great Depression and the 1940s, many of whom fought in World War II.
It is the silent generation and the greatest generation that is responsible for creating internationalism and promoting international organisations such as the European Union and the United Nations to maintain peace in Europe and the rest of the world.
These two generations will mostly be dead by 2040, and the new generations that take their place are not interested in globalisation and securing world piece for future generations.
The United Kingdom’s former Prime Minister John Major, who was in office from 1990 to 1997, marked the passing and retirement of the greatest generation during the 1992 general election.
In a podcast, when he took part in an interview with former Conservative Minister Rory Stewart and ex-Labour fix-it man Alistair Campbell, he said that their passing and retirement marked the turning point of the Conservative Party’s attitude to international and intergovernmental institutions.
Put simply, the older generations favoured internationalism because they lived and groaned up in the aftermath and during World War II and the newer generations born after 1945, I’ve only ever known piece, particularly in western developed nations.
Polls conducted in the United States now show less than half (48%) of Gen Z and millennials believe the U.S. should publicly voice support of Israel compared with 63% of Gen Xers, 83% of baby boomers and 86% of members of the Silent Generation.
Furthermore, the United States has voted into office increasingly isolationist presidential candidates since the election of Bill Clinton in 1992, throwing out of office the one-term Republican president George H Butch Watson (1989 to 1992), who had the experience and credentials to chart America into a new future in the post-Cold War world.
Instead, the United States had the man with the experience to make America’s new international foreign policies voted out of office.
What happened instead? America, for over 30 years, has been living off the glory days of post-World War II and post-Cold War political environments without making anything new.
The American public is not interested in foreign policy or geopolitics and instead reverting to America’s historical norm of isolationism and not getting involved in foreign conflicts; people forget that up until the early 20th century, this was the American normal foreign policy.
Western nations are predominantly nations that are part of the European Union, North America, and other nations linked to liberal democracies and Western European cultures, particularly what constitutes Europe politically and culturally is much larger than Europe itself.
West has been moving in perpetual crisis since the 2008 financial crash due to political leadership and even the general public not being willing to use power in the geopolitical sense due to four main reasons:
· The legacy of colonialism
· Unfounded belief that the West is evil in the United States is an evil empire and finally
· Society and political leaders not accepting the true nature of international politics and geopolitics
· Europe has been in a state of war since the fall of the Western Rome Empire in 476AD
According to Konstantin Kisin, a British and Russian author, writer, and podcaster, it is the application and use of power to serve your citizens.
The United States, the world’s greatest superpower, consumes five times as many resources as any other nation and people on this planet.
This success is caused by the protection and economic security created by the United States post-World War II world order, which has led to prosperity throughout the West until today.
French Empire in Africa: Why the West is in Perpetual Crisis
The Legacy of Colonialism
European nations from the late 15th century until the collapse of the old colonial powers, Spain and Portugal, in the early 19th century and the withdrawal of French and British from their old colonial territories in the mid-20th century.
The British Empire officially disbanded with the handover of Hong Kong to the People’s Republic of China in 1997, marking the end of Britain as an empire.
With the European nation’s colonial legacy, there is a robust, ingrained reluctance to interfere in African countries outright to interfere in other nations’ politics, the very least directly.
However, it must be stated the political situation is more complicated. For instance, the French have held a quasi-empire in northern Africa due to influencing government with them using the currency African franc, the French language as a common language and the recent coup d’états in Niger in 2023, marking the end of French influence in that region.
The French, British, German and others are reluctant to handle the European migrant crisis, which has been an ongoing crisis since 2013 due to the Arab Spring from 2010 to 2019, and this year, a net inflow of migrants is at least 1,200,000 people.
There is a misplaced view within European leadership, particularly in Germany, which is responsible for two world wars and the deaths of nearly a hundred million people, including 6 million Jews in the Holocaust, that they need to atone for their sins, and this is why Germany opened its borders to migrants.
Under the leadership of former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, in 2015, the nation had 1 million migrants, and as of 2022, that figure is now 2.7 million, though this data may not be accurate.
America War of Independence: Why the West is in Perpetual Crisis
The Evil Empire
There is a view pushed by the enemies of democracy, freedom, and the American world system created after the Second World War that the United States is a force for evil in this world.
Furthermore, this viewpoint is being driven by the world becoming geopolitically multipolar.
What this means in politics and international relations terms is that the world is now becoming home to more than one superpower. In practical terms, it is more likely to be regional powers, with each region having one or more great powers dominating the politics within their areas.
This is driven by two factors: the industrialisation and prosperity that the United States created, which enabled nations who did not have access to resources to have the security of global oceans, which enabled free trade and for countries to begin industrialisation and specialisation.
Two great examples of specialisation are the Republic of Taiwan, which creates 90% of global semiconductor chips and the British, which is still the global leader in financial services.
What globalisation did was turn the world into one giant marketplace for goods and services, as well as affordable, which is why poor villages in Africa or People living in the Gaza Strip living in poverty have access to smartphones.
Nations don’t just fight wars with guns and rockets; they fight with war using culture, pushing forward their narrative, rightly or wrongly, that they should influence their regions, such as the Russians, Chinese, Iranians and India, to a lesser extent wanting to be out of the influence of the American system.
What these nations want is to be free of American influence, be free of Western influence and pursue geopolitical policies which they believe rightly or wrongly will be better off without being influenced by the United States of America.
Four people reading this who are curious about what an international world would look like if the United States dismantled its navy and permanently withdrew from geopolitics would see a world reminiscent of the 19th century.
For Europe, due to its declining geographical region, the dominant powers would be the French and English.
In the Far East, it would be China, India and Japan, though to a lesser extent for that nation due to its demographic decline and having more adults in diapers than newborn babies.
As for Africa, my money would be on Nigeria and South Africa. As for North America, that would still be the United States, a continental nation like India and China, and they will most likely have a powerful position in the world.
The Middle East would have to be Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Israel to a lesser extent because Turkey and Israel are most likely to make arrangements to carve up their interests in the region. However, Turkey and Greece may go to war over influence in the Aegean Sea.
Justin Trudeau: Why the West is in Perpetual Crisis
Western Liberalism
In 2017, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau declared Canada the first postnational state; this means he does not see a landmass that any people living there have a claim to that land or that national identity is a genuine belief.
What we consider nationhood was created in the aftermath of the French Revolution of 1789 because the People in France who identified as French were mainly the intelligentsia and people living in cities, so around just 20% of the population.
Therefore, to create unity in the new French Republic and later under the first French Empire was to create a nation-state with one particular ethnic group or people’s belief in similar ideologies, speaking the same languages and believing their nation and its history special.
Nation-states were created and became the predominant method of ruling a land mass area dominated by one or similar ethnic groups due to this being the most straightforward method to govern nations.
With empires typically made of multiple ethnic groups, one ethnic group ruling a nation-state is far easier to manage.
The reason this attitude of not identifying with a nation’s history is making the West have a perpetual crisis is that if you do not believe in your nation, believe in its own right to exist, or believe in its identity, then no political leader or even its people will fight to protect it.
Using the analogy used by the historians David Starkey and Edward Gibbon, the Roman Empire did not fall to armies or farming, but due to its people no longer caring if it existed or if it was destroyed, it did not fall in a cataclysm instead died in a whimper because the Roman people no longer cared.
Suppose the Western people no longer care about their cultural legacy and are unwilling to share their national story with its history and culture. In that case, that too will fall into perpetual crisis, just like what happened to the Roman Empire.
Rome Empire Map: Why the West is in Perpetual Crisis
The End of the Roman Empire
Watson Roman Empire finally collapsed in 476 A.D. From then until 1945, Europe was in a state of perpetual wars either internally or externally with its neighbours with kingdoms fighting for dominance, which lasted 1469 years or just short of 1 ½ millennium.
These wars and people reading this who are of European descent either by culture or by genetics, our grandfathers or even parents lived through two world wars in the 20th century, and they are the descendants of multiple wars stretching back to the fall of the Roman Empire.
This legacy of violence and destruction has traumatised Western European and Western psyches both emotionally and politically, with nations that are part of the West no longer interested in engaging in international politics and geopolitics the way they used before 1945.
The reason why this is leading the West into perpetual crisis is that, collectively, in our national memories, we have had enough of war and violence and are no longer willing to make decisions for our security that have instead outsourced to the United States of America that doesn’t have over millennia worth of trauma to deal with.
However, it must be highlighted that the United States has had enough of foreign wars and conflicts with American presidents since 1992, with the election of Bill Clinton having become increasingly isolationist and reactive, not proactive to a perpetual crisis.
Germany faces three major problems, with two currently out of Germany’s control.
No matter what happens, we will be witnessing the end of Germany as we know it over the next three decades and the end of the German ethnicity and culture within our lifetime.
Either way, Germany grew as a culture and nation, and we know today won’t be here by the end of the century.
The three issues that will cause the end of Germany are its declining demographics, which have been declining for over a hundred years; Germany has been over-reliant on natural resources from the Russian Federation and sending its manufacturing to China.
The final issue affecting Germany is its energy policy; with Germany having had multiple coalition governments with the Green Party of Germany, it has closed down other avenues for energy generation in favour of green energy.
At best, green energy, which is nuclear, solar, wind and other natural sources, only makes up 10% of Germany’s energy consumption.
This doesn’t make green energy bad, but only solar energy works where it’s sunny and wind where it’s windy. If you’ve ever been to Germany, it is not a very sunny place, so solar energy is not viable to replace traditional fossil fuels.
The problem with many European nations and other Western nations is the ideological gap between what works, what the voters want and reality. In this century, the nations that will prosper the most will be those plugged into reality.
The End of Germany as We Know It
Choices Germany Made
The reason Germany is staring down the barrel of a gun and seeing the destruction of its ethnic group within this century is due to choices made by the German government, German manufacturing and the choices of the German people not to reproduce.
These historical and demographic trends have affected Germany for over a century and since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. During the Cold War, Germany chose to maintain positive relations with the Soviet Union and eastern Germany.
The positive outcome of this experience was that Germany was reunited in 1990. From this experience, Germany hoped that the Russians and Chinese would transform from a totalitarian regime committing mass murder and genocide governments.
However, the Germans have chosen its two main trading partners, Russia and China, and cut ties with the United States even though the Americans are not the evil Empire.
With the war in Ukraine since February 2022, trade relations between the Russian Federation and Communist China collapsed immediately after trade sanctions started in Russia; the Germans opted to move predominantly to China as a trading partner.
Unfortunately, the Germans are finding out you cannot guarantee support and cooperation from dictatorships and totalitarian regimes, and now they have to pay for the consequences.
The driving force behind deglobalisation is the decrease in the size of United States destroyers in terms of the available numbers to patrol global shipping lanes and protect international shipping not just for the United States and its allies but also for non-aligned nations, including Russia and China.
As of writing, the United States has 150 destroyers and 11 supercarriers, insufficient to protect the global oceans. Its leading American allies, such as the Japanese, began a rearmament programme to protect their national interests.
As globalisation breaks down because the USA is no longer interested in maintaining a globalised international economy, the US allies will begin rearming themselves and pursuing a more independent foreign policy strategy.
The United States does not need globalisation even though it will lead to higher living costs and inflation as it brings its industries and manufacturing back to America.
Furthermore, the United States is a continental economy, meaning unlike smaller nations that have fewer resources, the United States doesn’t need globalisation.
Deglobalisation and Globalisation: Yalter Conference
Why America Created Globalisation
Unlike the British Empire during the age of the Pax Britannica from 1815 to 1914, the British pursued a free trade policy and the development of the first version of globalisation to enrich the English economy and expand its influence globally.
The British needed its empire to become wealthy by trading in foreign markets within the imperial system that the British and other imperial powers created in the 18th, 19th, and early 20th centuries.
Furthermore, Britain is an island nation much smaller than its neighbouring European rivals and tiny compared to the United States. For the British to be a relevant power and successful, it relied on international trade and shipping.
The United States never needed globalisation and only created globalisation as we know it; the end of World War II in 1945 was to buy an alliance and win the Cold War against the Soviet Union, which lasted from 1945 to 1989 and the final collapse of the Soviet system in 1990.
With the end of the Cold War, the United States’ incentive to maintain globalisation is fading, and the growing disinterest of the United States since 1992 is leading to a deglobalisation of the international world order.
For people interested in the Far East, Japan’s rearmament is one of the biggest news stories to hit the region. It is historically significant for the Japanese, with their pacifist constitution being in force since the end of the Second World War in 1945.
On September 16, 2022, Fumio Kishida, the Prime Minister of Japan since 2021, released three new versions of national security documents focusing on national security, national defence strategy and national defence programme.
The papers are the first significant change to Japanese defence policy since 2013; documents are also blunt regarding the threats facing the Japanese home islands being described as ‘the most severe and complex security environments as the end of World War II’.
One of the fundamental changes they made to the Japanese military budget was a move away from spending 1% of the national GDP, and national defence was the standard North Atlantic Treaty Organisation convention of 2% of GDP.
Currently, as a share of GDP placed in context, the United States of America only spends 3.1% of national GDP and is expected to decline to 2.8% by 2033. The current economy of the United States is currently at in terms of GDP $26.854 trillion. In comparison, Japan’s GDP is at $4.4 trillion and is the world’s third wealthiest nation.
Regarding Japan’s chief Pacific rival, the Chinese government announces defence expenditure information annually.
In March 2023, China announced a yearly defence budget of RMB 1.55 trillion ($224.8 billion)1, marking a 7.2 per cent increase from the 2022 budget of RMB 1.45 trillion ($229.6 billion).
Japan’s Rearmament
Why Japan Wants to Rearm
The current president of Japan is pursuing the rearmament and re-militarisation of his nation, which is quite surprising due to Fumio Kishida supporting policies of nuclear disarmament and coming from the piece wing of the Liberal Democratic party (自由民主党, Jiyū-Minshutō).
The other two significant threats to the Japanese were the North Koreans and Russians. People in predominantly Europe forget that Russia stretches from Eastern Europe to the Japanese archipelago with the Sakhalin Island.
The Japanese did not favour rearmament and remilitarisation for two fundamental political reasons. First, Japan lost World War II and the United States in retaliation rather than trying the Japanese culture or its independence as a people.
America opted for a truly American and unique strategy to integrate Japan into the global economy, maintain Japanese identity and enforce a Japanese peace constitution.
It occurred on May 3, 1947, immediately after World War II. The text of the article of the Japanese Government formally renounces war as a right of sovereignty and refuses to settle disputes using military force.
The second or most fundamental reason the Japanese did not maintain a strong military was the security provided by the United States during the Pax Americana.
Unfortunately, the Japanese know Americans are no longer interested in global affairs and being the world’s policeman.
Since the election of William ‘Bill’ Clinton in 1992, American presidents have been increasingly focused on internal American politics, and the American public has voted for increasingly isolationist presidents.
George W. Bush went against this mould primarily due to the wars in Afghanistan that focused American political presidential leadership mainly in that part of the globe, which prevented George W. Bush and his successors, Barack Obama and Donald Trump, from focusing on the Pacific.
It must be stated that it wasn’t Donald Trump and his successor, Joe Biden, that saw American foreign policy moving from the European continent to the Pacific.
Even with the seachange, the American Navy has consistently shrunk since the end of the Cold War in 1989 and no longer can secure the world shipping lanes.
According to the geopolitical analyst, author, and YouTube Peter Zilhan, America’s allies increasingly have to fend for themselves in a more chaotic and disorganised world.
Japan’s Rearmament
Why Japan Needs Weapons
With the USA being overstretched with the war in Ukraine and when it comes to pursuing a naval policy with the US destroyers down to 150 and a focus on supercarriers, which are nation killers are not practicable when it comes to protecting the world’s oceans, Japanese must rearm.
With this environment, North Korea, China and Russia have more missile capability than the Americans and Japanese have in that region.
Japanese coastal defence missiles are currently limited to a range of just 200 km; even the air missiles Japan has acquired from Norway are only capable of 480 km.
This is not something the Japanese can tolerate any longer, with the Japanese planning to at least have the capacity to launch missiles able to reach targets at least 16,000 km, which is far enough to give the Japanese the capabilities to attack Beijing and Pyongyang in retaliative strike.
The Japanese government that the only reason they would ever use this capacity in a first strike and not a retaliative strike would be if they had solid Intel that North Korea, China or Russia was planning to attack Japan or its allies in the Pacific.
Opening phases of Japan’s rearmament were the purchase of Tomahawk missiles from the USA and a focus on domestic production within the Japanese home islands.
Furthermore, the Japanese government has contracted Mitsubishi Heavy Industries to produce a Japanese homegrown type XII missile.
The Japanese government is moving quickly in a missile-buying bonanza to become less independent internationally from outside sources inside the Japanese home islands. Sipri stated that Japan gets 80% of its missiles from the USA.
Japanese are running out of Babies: Japan’s Rearmament
Problems With Japan’s Rearmament
The Japanese plan to rearm has one massive problem: the rearmament programme’s ability to have the population size necessary to fight a war on the battlefield and within industries.
Japan’s objective to improve the security situation in the region may not be feasible with Japan’s declining demographics, and its military has a problem with over 16,000 positions that cannot be filled.
If the Japanese cannot replace personnel, it is doubtful they could automate in time with the projection of the Chinese invading Taiwan within the next five years, nor is it possible to increase its birthrate in time.
The Japanese birthrate has been below replacement levels since the 1970s, partly due to the oil crisis in the early 70s and the issues in Japan and the ones being faced by most developed and industrial nations throughout the world.
The Japanese issues are caused by modern lifestyle, culture, and other factors that cannot be easily fixed, which Japan has been trying to fix for over three decades.
An option the Japanese could use is immigration. Unfortunately for Japan, South Korea and China, these are Monotonicity. Unlike their Western counterparts, they don’t have the option to bring immigration due to their protection attitudes to their culture.
Westerners, particularly people part of the Anglosphere, who are the English-speaking peoples, may perceive this as racist because if they moved to these nations, no matter what they do, they would never be considered Chinese or Japanese.
Western countries deduce they have this attitude toward culture. Still, it was decided politically and culturally to move away from a monoculture into a multicultural society, which these nations, as stated above, don’t have that option as a means to regrow the population numbers.
China is running out of Babies: Japan’s Rearmament
Chinese Internal Issues
The geopolitical analyst and author Peter Zilhan predicts that this decade will be China’s and Russia’s last decade as a serious international power, and he gives two main reasons for this.
The first one is a terminal demographic issue in these two nations that won’t start to recover until the twenty-second century.
The second reason is that the Russian Federation cannot maintain its multi-ethnic empire without a sufficient population, and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is unlikely but possible to maintain CCP leadership.
For these two reasons, war with China or Russia is highly possible.
Within the context of this article, China is the biggest problem for Japan.
The Chinese Communist Party is facing a perfect storm with an undercounting of its population by at least 100 million and China missing over 80 million women who have never been born due to the impact of the one-child policy.
The one-child policy was implemented due to the CCP’s ideology that allowed for state intervention, state eugenics and the overall attitude that the state has the right to play an active part in its population’s lives.
Because of these beliefs, the one-child policy, which started in 1979, limited Chinese couples to only one child due to the fear of mass starvation.
The long-term impact of that policy 40 years later is that millions of girls that could have been born have been aborted due to the desire to continue on the family name in the Chinese society that is more favourable to males.
Also, due to China’s declining demographic, it is a country that is getting old before it can get rich, in contrast to its neighbour Japan, which faced the same issue and has faced the same problem since the 1990s.
However, the Japanese managed to reindustrialise and revitalise its economy after it was devastated during World War II and became wealthy enough to pay for its increased ageing population.
As for China, it has run out of time with its Boomer generation hitting retirement this decade and the bulk of them most likely being dead by 2040.
What this means for the China Communist Party to survive even though it will most likely lose any foreign war with the United States and its allies.
There is a solid amoral case for the Communist Party.
Even if it lost the war, it got to choose the time and place of its defeat and dictated the narrative of Chinese history after the event, where the Chinese Communist Party’s priority was survival.
The Chinese Communist Party have rewritten history before with China’s so-called hundred years of humiliation from 1837 to 1949, which is based partly on historical nonsense.
China has been divided for at least half its existence throughout its long history, if not more, depending on how you view Chinese civilisation.
It has repeatedly collapsed, faced rebellions, and has seen Southern China repeatedly breaking away from the North.
Chinese history is long and complicated, and the public only tends to get a slim-down version. Very few people understand the strong ethnic divide between northern and southern Chinese, according to Jerrard Diamond, author of Guns, Steel and Germs.
As for the CCP, it is to survive. If this means at least half a billion dead Chinese, according to Peter Zilhan, that is something they can live with.
Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida has been in office since 2021, pushing for the rearmament and remilitarisation of the Japanese home islands.
Currently, Japan has no capacity outside of the support of the United States to launch counterstrike’s against China and Korea.
Its missile range is limited to 200 km outside of the Japanese islands; to have the capacity to attack Beijing and Pyongyang, Japan will need a capacity of 16,000 km.
The Japanese have allowed their military capabilities to dwindle for two main reasons: Japan’s pacifist constitution was enforced at the end of World War II in 1945 and implemented in 1947.
Part of this constitution was the Japanese would not launch offensive operations and would only fight wars in self-defence.
Why Japan is Rearming
The Japanese government is now changing this policy, stating that Japan will only launch a first strike if its sovereign independence is at stake.
They are further stressing that the only reason it would launch a pre-emptive strike is if they had reliable military intelligence that they are facing an immediate attack from a hostile nation.
The second reason the Japanese demilitarised after World War II was the United States being a guarantee of global shipping lanes and its allies willingly or unwillingly in the case of Japan giving over its foreign policy to the United States in return for protection.
It has been over 78 years since the end of World War II, and the United States was able to maintain this monopoly and control over its ally’s foreign policy because the United States created the international system and globalisation which enabled all nations to have access to resources outside of the home nations territory.
One of the key reasons why the Japanese started their imperialism project and took swathes of territory in the Pacific and on the Eurasian continent was the lack of natural resources inside the Japanese home islands.
So, in an imperialist and the survival of the fittest international environment, the Japanese chose to survive and prosper by taking lands and resources from others.
The Americans changed this by protecting global trade and enforcing global peace amongst their allies.
Since the election of Bill Clinton in 1992, the Japanese have seen the Americans consistently vote into office individuals who are increasingly isolationist and disinterested in global affairs.
With America drawing this disenfranchisement in the American project of globalisation and internationalism that is causing American allies to start implementing their own foreign policy based upon their national interest, nations like Japan need to rearm.
In some respects, the American withdrawal from the world and being overstretched with the conflict in Ukraine and the possibility of a war in Taiwan in the next five years can be likened to the Roman Empire when it was heading towards its decline, having to defend far-flung provinces and overstretched militarily and financially.
Currently, the USA only has 150 destroyers and 11 supercarriers, which is not enough ships to protect global shipping lanes, which will see, according to the geopolitical analysis Peter Zilhan, more disorder happening in the increasingly deglobalised world.
The Chinese political system over this decade will be critical for whether or not it will collapse its political system in its current form due to the series of crises hitting the Chinese state, such as China’s terminal demographic decline, its housing crisis and the breakdown of globalisation.
It would be idiotic to predict the future of China’s political system throughout its long and bloody history of over 3,500 to 4,000 years.
China is full of historical examples where it collapsed as a united political entity only to be reunited.
Also, this being the modern world and factoring in modern technologies, it is unpredictable to see what will happen and that the crises could be delayed.
The Chinese housing crisis is caused by China’s investment-based economic model, which means resources and capital flow towards the development and construction within China, artificially raising national GDP.
Investing in infrastructure leads to economic growth, and better infrastructure helps to build any economy; this is the basis of Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations, published in 1776.
Also, since 1980, China has transformed itself from an agricultural economy into an industrial and urbanised economy within 40 years, with its population going from 80% of its people living in rural areas to now living within inner cities and urban areas.
Despite the success in China being replicated in South Korea and Japan, the investment model of investing in infrastructure is not sustainable and can lead to stagnation, which Japan has experienced for over 30 years.
Unlike the Chinese, the Korean and Japanese private investment models could balance out its economy in international investment opportunities and outsource its manufacturing abroad due to Japan suffering terminal demographic decline.
Unfortunately, the Chinese capital flight restrictions meant they looked for alternatives to invest their capital in the Chinese housing market.
The issue with the Chinese housing market and why it’s facing a housing crisis is that there is enough housing for twice the Chinese population, and the Chinese have overbuilt by 200%.
Furthermore, the Chinese citizens dumped their life savings into housing, generating the world’s most massive overbuild. As China collapses and people’s money is tied up in this useless real estate, it doesn’t take much to imagine what happens next. Let’s say Xi might be losing some of his fan base.
People typically invest their capital into housing costs under normal circumstances because the housing price doubles an average every 20 years.
As long as there is a high demand for housing, housing prices continue to increase.
Unfortunately, the Chinese housing crisis is caused by too much supply, which means that the worth of properties will decrease, making people’s investments into the housing market a net loss and the possibility they can sell their property and live off their savings becoming increasingly remote.
What does it mean to be Conservative, and how does it mean different things to different people’s indifferent nations, different cultures, different legal systems, and differences in how their societies are governed and the historical background of their nation?
A Conservative from the United States or the Western world in ultraconservative nations like Iraq, Iran or Saudi Arabia will be seen as radical leftists.
Conservatism also means many different things to people on politics’ left and right sides.
On the left, a Conservative is somebody who favours small government and low taxes and is in favour of liberal economic policies and religious conservatism.
In contrast, a Conservative may view a liberal or leftist as somebody who wants to tax the rich, destroy normative and cultural institutions, and see the elimination of a nation’s identity.
This can be seen strikingly in 2015 when Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau declared his country the world’s first post-national state while defining Canadian values.
This means that Postnationalism or non-nationalism is the process or trend by which nation-states and national identities lose their importance relative to cross-nation and self-organised or supranational and global entities and local entities.
What Justin Trudeau and other liberals are aiming for is a world of their nations not having ties to their historical past and their cultural legacies, in this case, the Anglo-Saxon past and the history of English.
To a lesser extent, nations such as America, Australia, Canada and other postcolonial countries of the conservative and social traditions developed and created in England.
These institutions are the English common law and legal system that is not top-down but bottom-up when it comes to creating and implementing laws, not from a higher authority but from an authority from the People.
The Death of Conservatism: the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
The Lesson from Edward Gibbon
Edward Gibbon is a historian and author from the 18th century. He created his most famous work, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, where he discusses why the Roman Empire fell and how this was linked to the failure to pass on the cultural legacy of Rome to another generation.
He strongly linked the death of conservatism in antiquity and the early mediaeval ages to the fall of the Roman Empire.
His reasoning can be linked to people in our time not having children, who are not creating a family unit and a social and educational environment where a legacy of culture, nationhood, and belief in their own home nation identity is not passed on to their children.
This is why people like Justin Trudeau and people educated within liberal educational systems don’t see themselves as English, American, Canadian or other because they were raised to be individualistic and not part of a community.
You may be familiar with this, but you must ask yourself if you have a father, mother, brothers, uncles, or other family connections worth my titles and descriptions.
Suppose these connections are fragile and can easily be broken. This is a sign of the failure of intergenerational families from the Silent Generation that fought during World War II from 1939 to 1945.
The succeeding generations of boomers, Generation X, Generation Millennials, and Generation Z, have failed to pass on the baton of culture, civilisation, and other legacies of their societies to the next generation.
According to historian David Starkey and the Conservative philosopher and politician Edmund Burke, Conservatism is each generation passing on the legacy of previous generations and the institutions created for each succeeding generation.
Conservatism is not the absence of change, merely the conservation of national identity and ensuring there is a nation and a better society and that each subsequent generation is simply the custodian and protector of that legacy for England; this has been happening for over 40 generations.
For the Chinese, that would be 66 to 88 generations.
The proverb speaks to public service, to actions that benefit others, not oneself.
The Death of Conservatism
Liberalism is the Death of Duty
What does it mean to have a liberal society, and how to be liberal is to be free of social constraints, which include the family and other constraints that can be positive, such as fatherhood and devotion to the family? Liberalism is the focus on the individual over society as a whole.
Economic and social liberalism has strengthened since at least the 18th century. It can be argued the reason for its success can be seen in its poster child of liberalism, the United States and the British Empire.
To varying degrees of success nearly 300 years, the most dominant nations on this planet have been nations that part of the Anglo-Saxon culture grew and had the legacy of liberalism and freedom baked into their political systems.
This freedom has seen the rise of their economies and the development of unprecedented technological change since the ending of World War II in 1945.
But with the stated liberalism is the death of duty and lease to people’s liberation, which is both good and bad, you cannot be a liberal if you are a mother or have commitments to something beyond your wants and desires.
China is in crisis; according to geopolitical analyst and author Peter Zeihan, this decade will be China’s last decade as an international power, and the entire system of the Chinese Communist Party may also implode with the breakup of China.
It’s not clear precisely what is happening in China, but China is in crisis, with youth unemployment hitting a high in June 2023, with 21.3% of people aged between 16 and 24 unemployed.
The reason is that not enough graduate jobs are being created in the Chinese economy to develop its middle class.
There is a mismatch between Chinese university graduates and the jobs available within the Chinese economy.
The last time there was this imbalance in China was the Tiananmen Square massacre of 1989, with mass protests on the Chinese mainland.
China is also facing a crisis with its population being miscounted by at least 100 million people, and those people are the millennials who have not been born, which has increased the price of labour within China and with retirement and ageing out of the Boomer generation.
Furthermore, in China, the Boomer generation is now hitting mass retirement at 60 unless they change their policy and increase the working age by decree or by law.
This will further harm China’s ability to export manufactured goods at low prices, with the United States moving its suppliers of manufacturing goods from China to Mexico to ensure Americans still have the choice and convenience of cheap manufacturing goods.
The rest of the world has not noticed the growing issues and crisis rowing within China due to distractions within domestic politics with the United States focusing on the Orange Man, a.k.a. Donald Trump, the Japanese rearming, the cover 19 pandemic due to governments looking inwards and not outwards.
China in Crisis and Chinese Baby
What Does This Mean with China in Crisis
The Chinese Communist Party put forward a grand vision of China being a united entity for at least over 2000 years, if not more, going back around four millennia; this is, unfortunately, complete and utter horse shit.
As a united entity, China has spent more years being divided into separate warring kingdoms than it has been a united entity.
China is a monoculture dominated by the Han Chinese, making up 92% of its population, though these figures vary by percentage points.
China is typically disunited, but during different moments in its long and bloody history, a power in the northern plains of China, a.k.a. northern China, is united under new dynasties or regimes that proceeded to go on and conquer the other regions of China.
China is a massive country that requires a centralised government typically run from northern China, with the other regions breaking away at different points in history only to be reintegrated into greater China.
China faces many crises that could see the nation shatter and reintegrate after a Civil War period.
China in Crisis Food and Energy
Food and Energy
China is dependent upon food and energy imports, and this is a reason why China is facing a crisis due to the reliance on supply routes stretching from the Bosporus and the Aegean, through the Persian Gulf and through the Indian and Vietnam, seas which is a vulnerable supply line for China.
All it takes is China’s enemies or state-sponsored privateers to seize these goods, which could devastate the Chinese economy.
If the USA and China went to war today, China would starve to death within six months.
China is dependent upon global supply chains and global security that have historically been maintained by the Pax Britannica from 1815 to 1914 and then from 1945 to the present day by the Pax Americans.
Basically, the Chinese depend on infrastructure and, more importantly, the protection of the seas that was guaranteed historically by the Royal Navy and then the U.S. Navy.
With the United States no longer interested in global affairs and that system is going away, the U.S. Navy focused on constructing supercarriers, which are nation killers and not destroyer-heavy Navy that is essential for protecting global shipping lanes.
