zlacker

[return to "China Moon Mission: Aiming for 2030 lunar landing"]
1. hdivid+ef[view] [source] 2026-02-03 20:42:54
>>rbanff+(OP)
This space race is different for one core reason: China is more stable than the Soviet Union was in the 1960s.

If we beat the Chinese somehow, I don't think they'll just dismantle their space program and focus on Earth. They'll keep going, and they have the economic base to expand their program.

I think we're seeing the beginning of a new kind of space race. It's likely to be much longer term and grander in scale over time, as we compete for the best spots on the Moon and the first human landing on Mars in the decades to come.

◧◩
2. JumpCr+Jf[view] [source] 2026-02-03 20:45:27
>>hdivid+ef
> China is more stable than the Soviet Union was in the 1960s

Xi literally just purged “the country’s top military leader, Gen. Zhang Youxia, and an associate, Gen. Liu Zhenli” [1].

This is the mark of a dictator. Not the Soviet Union at its finest.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/03/us/politics/china-xi-mili...

◧◩◪
3. smallm+Qk[view] [source] 2026-02-03 21:10:49
>>JumpCr+Jf
Did the USSR ever manufacture 80% of the stuff in your house?
◧◩◪◨
4. NoMore+pn[view] [source] 2026-02-03 21:23:49
>>smallm+Qk
If they had manufactured 80% of the stuff in my house, wouldn't Reagan have concluded that they had won the war before it started? A country that manufactures 80% of the things you need to live might just decide to not sell them to you if you misbehave.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. smallm+7u[view] [source] 2026-02-03 21:58:39
>>NoMore+pn
Yes, but the real question is if Reagan still would have pushed as hard for financialization and deindustrialization if he understood that he was ultimately selling American industry to communists.

I think he would have. I think he hated American labor more than he hated foreign communists. If his head were still around in a Futurama Jar to comment on the matter, I think he would be blaming American workers for the consequences of his own policies.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. chrisc+5C[view] [source] 2026-02-03 22:41:00
>>smallm+7u
Reagan didnt push for deindustrialization and "the world is flat" world view didn't take precedence until after the fall of the Soviet Union in the 90s.

At the time, everyone was still optimistic that China would eventually become more open and even democratic, that Russia would not regress, etc.

It was still common for electronics and microprocessors to be made in USA well into the 90s. Reagan had nothing to do with the expansion of WTO and trade deficits with China that ballooned under HW, Clinton, Bush Jr and Obama.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. smallm+US[view] [source] 2026-02-04 00:16:02
>>chrisc+5C
You can't have financialization without deindustrialization and he didn't push in that direction, he shoved. This macroeconomic story is 500 years old. He knew what he was doing.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. Daedal+v61[view] [source] 2026-02-04 01:43:24
>>smallm+US
you give the 'elites' far too much credit. reagan was a tv cowboy that got elected because he was really popular, and cut taxes. Bush 1 was a cowboy and oil man from texas, and clinton was a cowboy from arkansas who made money trading cattle futures and doing land deals in the ozarks. Bush 2 grew up in rural texas and had a GPA of 2.35.

these people were really good at fundraising and getting elected, nobody after kissinger was competent in these ideas (kissingers morality is debatable, but he was very competent)

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. meekaa+ea2[view] [source] 2026-02-04 11:08:25
>>Daedal+v61
But wasnt it kissinger who normalized relationship with china?
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦
10. Daedal+pV2[view] [source] 2026-02-04 15:48:59
>>meekaa+ea2
yes he did, but that was only diplomatic relations not industrial policy and tariffs. this was also done in the context of dividing the communist spheres.

mainland chinese manufacturing and trade in the 70s and 80s was still mostly garments, appliance assembly and so on. the kind of thing you see in bangladesh today - even vietnam has mostly developed past garment manufacturing.

the world leading electronics manufacturing and precision components only began in china after bill clinton invited china into the wto in 99/2000 and the heavy capital started to flow. even by then, I don't think the USG expected shenzhen to exist

china didn't really move from bicycles to private car ownership until the 00s.

I mean its easy to forget; if you said in 1985, 1990, 1995, 2000, maybe even 2005 that china would be the worlds largest producer of cars, electronic cars, smart phones, drones, etc, on track to develop its own EUV lithography, and that many chinese cities would have the highest living standards in the world, you would have sounded ludicrous. intel was king and nokia/blackberry/motorola were the giants in cellular

[go to top]