Guns of Infinity



Ultimately, my problem is less with the CCP as a whole and more with Mao. A more competent leader from either the GMD or the CCP would have served the Chinese people better in the post-war period, and either case would have certainly made China better off than it is today (which is not to say it would have been anywhere near good, simply a less horrifying dystopian nightmare-state).

Unfortunately, Mao won both the struggle within his own party, and the struggle for China not because he was the better leader, but through a combination of the Japanese Invasion, the eventual abandonment of almost all of China’s allies, and the simple fact that Mao was a murderous sociopath who was better at stealing power than using it.


In the case of the post-Napoleonic Netherlands the King, his government and the (ultra) rich. The shocks were respectively 1848 and the fear of revolution which led to a semblance of democracy (even if it was with census voting) being restored at all, it also led to formal and for the most part de-facto abolition of serfdom and inherited debts (debt-bondage) in the Netherlands proper (though not yet in the colonies). The abolition of slavery, though that was mostly a colonial thing for most of our history was also abolished due to the external “shock” of the Union winning the US civil war in 1863, which sucked the last hopes of profit that we could re-start a slave trade with a newly independent Confederacy out of those few elites who still held significant money and interests in slavery at the time.
The second was of course the Russian revolution, which led to them dropping the objections to universal voting rights for men (1917) and women’s suffrage (1919) in short order. Of course in the 1930’s reactionary governments did re-introduce the poll tax in order to limit suffrage again, though at the time it was presented as a necessary economic measure to combat the effects of great depression in this country.
The last great shock was of course the German occupation during WWII, the subsequent liberation by the Canadians (so in a way Canada more than anything else has been responsible for giving social democracy in this country a safe political space relatively free from repression, so thanks Canada) and the Marshall plan (Which provided the funds for the first social democratic re distributive programs to work, so thanks USA) which led to the rise of social democracy and more or less made us stop being an isolationist, paleoconservative holdout with no social safety system in Europe and become one of the EEC’s founders.

In two of those three cases the “shocking” external events helped reformers gain what often decades of also often quite fierce campaigning and lobbying at home could not accomplish and moreover they did so in a mostly bloodless fashion through the power of frightening our elites in power at the time.

True, it would probably have been better for everybody if Song Jiaoren had succeeded in curtailing the sort of strongmanship everybody from Yuan Shikai to Chiang to Mao would later use to rule. A real, more or less functional parliament in China would have been a pretty huge game changer.
That would possibly have allowed something like the later rural reconstruction party to come to power through relatively bloodless and democratic means.

For most of history for the larger and powerful countries that would be losing wars.


They tried, more than once. The repeated failure of that approach led to the idea that there needed to be a stage of political tutelage before constitutional governance would actually stick.


I think an alternate 1913 where Song wins out over Yuan Shikai could have been one of the more promising moments for Chinese Democracy however flawed to sort-of stick around for the long haul.


I think it would have delayed the inevitable. The Republic might have lasted another two or three years before collapsing, but without the inertia and borrowed legitimacy the imperial system provided, everything would have fallen apart eventually.


So in a way, Trump shocking America can be considered a good thing. Since it shows that large swathes of America believe that we need reform and the jolt to go and bring about this reform is Donald Trump. Is this what you’re basically thinking @idonotlikeusernames? Because, the Donald is certainly enough of a shock to be able to upend the social order and undo decades of systemic progress in America and significantly cripple the west. But, you know, I’m sure the Dutch will find a way to improve themselves with the downfall of the Pax-Americana


I surprise none of his bodyguards or allies didn’t shoot him in the back once they saw how crazy he was. Were they really that loyal/scare of him?


It also visits a significant amount of suffering onto millions of Americans and people around the world, so I can’t see that approach as anything less than sociopathic.

One could ask the same of pretty much any totalitarian “madman”. In the best case, the assassin still dies messily, and worse cases get progressively worse.


The biggest problem is that they simply don’t care. They don’t feel like it is their responsibility to intervene in the affairs of other nations or maintain the responsibilities of the international institutions we built on the lives of our and our allies dead. Many Americans just want to look internally and fix our own problems at the expense of the rest of the world because many Americans feel that we’re being taken advantage of and that everyone looks down on us. But, those are the more broad thinking of those who voted for someone like Trump. The majority of the Americans who voted for Trump voted because they saw things that they liked and ignored the disgust they felt in what they didn’t. Something has to change in this nation and I hope it changes for the better. But, I have a sinking feeling that we’ve been set back for a generation at least at this point.

That doesn’t mean we should give up. The things that are worth fighting for aren’t built in a day or even a few years. They are built over decades of hard work and sacrifice and I do believe that enough Americans will care to go and once again strive for greatness and work on trying to make the world a better place. We just need to believe in ourselves again and believe in our government. But that’s going to take a long while to do, if we can ever do those things again.


For America, no. For us that remains to be seen, our future is more in the EU’s hands. Though I think President Bernie could have made some positive waves over here. Though I would describe neither Trump nor Bernie coming to power in the US as a real shock to our system in the same way our then King getting scared in 1948 or our then leaders crapping their pants at the Russian revolution were back then. Still getting that kind of shock is difficult in any time under any circumstances, I’m just saying in small countries like mine it can be external, even far away from us far more often, whereas in larger countries it more often needs to be domestic in origin to even be felt.

Let’s say it would have been the reverse would the US and certainly its general public have even really noticed if mr. Wilders had come to power here, if you had gone with say Martin O Malley? Pretty sure the effects would have been limited to a few raised eyebrows, whereas your Trump does influence things even here.

More generally speaking electing Hillary would have instead continued the gradual decline of the Pax Americana, which would have been great assuming it would have somehow led to the EU getting its house in order, otherwise it would have been another four years of anxious waiting. The point with gradual decline is that even that too reaches a point of no return eventually and much like with China without the benefit of historical hindsight it’s pretty damned hard to guess at where and when that’s going to be.
Our own DIEM25 thinks we have for example till 2025 at most to turn Europe around and get the EU’s house in order. Are they right? Well you go step in a time machine and tell me.

I’ve already said that had I been entitled to vote in the US elections I would have left the top of my ticket blank (or voted for Hillary/Blank, cause there is no force on Earth that could have gotten me to vote for Kaine) and likely held my nose by voting Dems or the occasional independent down ballot.

Some of us likely would, but then some over here were practically salivating in anticipation of a Confederate victory and a revival of slavery and the slave trade, way back when.

As did the October Revolution in Russia to millions of Russians, that doesn’t change the fact that over here it led to the sudden vanishing of the “principled opposition” to universal and even women’s suffrage. Mainly because they were suddenly afraid of the reformist forces, they’d bloodily suppressed a few years back and had seen as a joke only months before then.
It was hell for Russia but it did end our own era of “political tutelage” by “wise and learned” (but mostly incredibly wealthy) men almost overnight. Otherwise it is certainly possible we would have needed years or even decades more of general strikes, local uprisings and in the worst case our own civil war to get it.
But then that is one of the possible advantages of small countries greater susceptibility to global events. Trump, fake news and having limited control over such things as global financial regulations (at least without the EU) would be the negatives.
Still in 1848 and again in 1917 those then in power over here were put in a far more conciliatory mood far quicker by global events then by anything our reformers actually managed on the domestic front.

That doesn’t mean I wish for them to happen (though if I were a serf in 1848 that might have been a bit different) just saying that when they do it will be exploited by smaller polities far from the “action”.


I feel like that’s less of a silver lining that you’d suspect.

Frankly, as someone from a country who had to suffer through the revolution, rather than one which was able to profiteer from it, I find that a pretty compelling argument to never trust a western leftist, ever.

Incidentally, that’s probably the reason why a lot of first and second-gen immigrants from Communist or formerly Communist countries have such a virulent hatred not just for Communism, but for Leftism in general.


We did not instigate that revolution we did not have Lenin in custody we certainly did not ship him back. Our reformers certainly didn’t dictate how our government at the time felt about it. It was their own psychological reaction to those events that made them drop their previously intractable “principled opposition” to “mass suffrage” and then women’s suffrage very quickly after that.
Without the revolution in Russia I guess our own cycles of protests and (general) strikes and repression after would have continued for years (or possibly even decades) until one of the sides either gave in or one of our neighbours finally got tired of it. France, Germany or Britain being the usual culprits here. They would then have forced a “solution” upon us (in which case it would have been seen as less than satisfactory by all sides on account of having been imposed by a foreign power). In the worst case one of the strikes or the resulting repression could have really spun out of control and we’d have had our own civil war.
Of course being a tiny country that would have practically invited either or all of France, Germany or Britain into the mix too in all likelihood. Unfortunately with them most likely entering on the reactionary side.

Which isn’t to say that it wasn’t the normal order of business for large countries to profiteer of off smaller, weaker ones.
While we may not have suffered through that revolution we have suffered through plenty of invasions and periods of effectively foreign rule (The Spanish, the Austrians, the Germans, the French, the British) as have China’s smaller neighbours. Historically mostly by China.
We cannot stop our own alt-right from trying to profit to some extent off of Trump (though ironically they did better before Trump), much like only lobotomizing every possible reformer of any significance could have stopped reformist forces from profiting off of the events in 1848, 1917 and to a lesser extent 1863


If people wanted reform, they would have voted Bernie.

Trump hasn’t reformed anything. Even during his campaign the only reforms he promised were vague notions such as “draining the swamp.” But so far all he has done is take steps backward in almost every area.

At this rate, the next president isn’t even going to get any of their own policies through because they’ll be too busy cleaning up after Trump.


You’re still justifying supporting mass suffering abroad for gain at home. How does that make you different from the VOC apologists you claim to despise?

It’s also a normal order of business for industrialised Western nations to profit off the misfortune of less industrialised Eastern ones, usually using the same kind of justification you’re citing. “They’re bigger” makes little difference when you’re the ones with the wealth and infrastructure to benefit.

I’m not claiming that political movements shouldn’t try to adapt to world events, I’m just saying that this ghoulish fixation on trying to spin human disasters on the other side of the planet as “working out pretty okay for us, actually” is willfully parochial at best, and outright monstrous at worst.


I’d like to hope Trump’s election and its fallout were a wake up call to the idiots who voted him.

As despicable as professional politicians may be, they actually know how to get shit done inside the system.

Or that if a guy promises to get you your job back while taking away your healthcare this might be a bad deal.

Stuff like that. Like a deductive proof of concept.


Nope, they are firmly behind him. Fake news media isn’t giving the real stories.


Democratic socialist in Virginia State Assemble nice.


He motivates me.


Indeed, I hope this happens, but I fear it won’t.


That applies to basically anything Bernie Sanders related.