Quote:
Originally Posted by derangedhermit
In 200 years, though, the simple trend from today is to have China as the dominant / wealthiest world power, with plenty of time and money to develop a sophisticated technology-based military.
|
+1 to the rest.
A warning, though: I'd suggest "the
simplistic trend from today is to have China as the dominant/weathiest..." might be more accurate. Both at 200 years from now and at 50.
I know the "China ascendant" narrative is popular these days (much as the "Japan Dominant" narrative was in the 80's and "communism triumphant" was in the 50's) but looking behind the facade of the narrative will quickly reveal that China (much like India) is a 200 Million strong modern nation embedded within a billion-weak medieval peasant society. (To put it bluntly.) Such a country is inherently unstable and is just as likely to turn inwards or implode into civil war as it is to dominate. For example, China is as (comparatively) resource-poor as Japan (one reason they are both looking to Lunar mining--bye-bye treaties!) so, barring a Stalin-esque population reduction, the rise of a modern coastal China is going to be constrained by its need to address the needs of inland China. For generations. In fact, its economy is already showing signs of fragility.
(Just look at its nuclear arsenal--by all reports it is smaller than India and Pakistan, about 60 warheads total. It has one smallish aircraft carrier and no planned funding for even one as big as what the russians have deployed.)
The hidden assumptions behind most "China Domination" scenarios is that population size is *only* an asset and never a constraint. And that the west will do *nothing* to counter. That is *already* demonstrably false.
Geo-political reality changes slowly, which is why France is still somewhat relevant on the world stage.
Government ruthlessness can make up for a lot of economic contraints (C.F., USSR) but in the end the fundamentals will make themselves felt and China has the absolute worst fundamentals of any potential future world power.
Moving forward 200 years, I'd suggest resource-rich modern economies like Brazil, Australia, or even South Africa are as likely as the US or Consolidated Europe as being dominant space powers and more so than China or a "Greater Italy" out-of-nowhere power.
Just my 2 cents: I'm a contrarian, okay?
PS - Do note that the first semi-credible business plan for ramping up to asteroid mining is coming from a *private* company, Planetary Resources, in the west where the surrounding economy has the resources (material, technology, and *financial*) to support such a venture. And the roadmap runs through roads no government can tread, even China, Inc.
Playing economic catchup more often leads to more catchup needs, not leap-frogging.