Thanks Dwarkesh, really enjoy your interviews. This one seems an overly US centric view. The U.S. is now facing the consequences of decades of elite-led disinvestment in its own real economy. China’s rise is really about strategic coherence—enabled by the very financial and policy choices made by U.S. actors. The global system is being reshaped not by ideology, but by shifts in industrial capability, access to resources, debt burden, and resilience. The claim that the USA has always been about global democracy is not really supported by the amount of military intervention it has conducted to secure oil and US dollars for the world. Add in the squeeze of climate change and energy run-down we now all face is likely to favour adaptability and resilience.
My biggest takeaway is that treat China as a peer that can be steered at the margins, not the Soviet Union 2.0 that can be collapsed, nor an unstoppable juggernaut.
Another doubt I have is that a government that can’t keep wage growth above 4-5 % for long will eventually face political blow-back, even in an authoritarian system. So this supply side focus is not cost-free for the CCP I wonder what the calculus looks like here?
Thanks Dwarkesh, really enjoy your interviews. This one seems an overly US centric view. The U.S. is now facing the consequences of decades of elite-led disinvestment in its own real economy. China’s rise is really about strategic coherence—enabled by the very financial and policy choices made by U.S. actors. The global system is being reshaped not by ideology, but by shifts in industrial capability, access to resources, debt burden, and resilience. The claim that the USA has always been about global democracy is not really supported by the amount of military intervention it has conducted to secure oil and US dollars for the world. Add in the squeeze of climate change and energy run-down we now all face is likely to favour adaptability and resilience.
My biggest takeaway is that treat China as a peer that can be steered at the margins, not the Soviet Union 2.0 that can be collapsed, nor an unstoppable juggernaut.
Another doubt I have is that a government that can’t keep wage growth above 4-5 % for long will eventually face political blow-back, even in an authoritarian system. So this supply side focus is not cost-free for the CCP I wonder what the calculus looks like here?