Global Effects Lacking Chinas Growth

Assuming China post Mao does not acquire is current leadership & government system, but instead a dysfunctional hardline socialist leadership or kleptocracy, or maybe a fragmenting decentralizing failing state.

What are the global effects economically & politically? One is the US acquires its cheap imports elsewhere, boosting other Asian, American, or African economies. A second is the dynamics of international politics in SE Asia and pacifica will be very different. The main concern in the S China Sea being mainland based piracy.
 
This is something I’ve thought about a lot. In some ways it might be beneficial; lacking such a vast, organized pool of dirt cheap labor could slow the rate of western countries flushing their manufacturing jobs and wealth away, the knock on effects of which would be enormous. That’s not to say it wouldn’t happen, but spreading that wealth across many different low income countries would be huge. Maybe a liberalized Soviet Union or Russian successor state would vacuum up that investment and make Angry China a sort of pit bull they can use to keep people on their toes, similar but not identical to OTL China - NK.

On the other hand, there’s an excellent chance that China would become a gigantic, overpopulated, seething North Korea on steroids, causing trouble for the entire region and rattling everyone’s cage, perhaps good for wrangling all these disparate states into a US facing alliance, given the lack of competitors. Continuing down that particular rabbit hole, a belligerent China could lead to a resurgent, confident Japan that challenges American hegemony in the region.

Regardless, I think it’s likely that a bottled up, isolatated, “East is Red” China still existing in the year 2018 would be a threat to world order that makes otl NK look like child’s play.
 
Thje fragmenting failing state might be the most benign in politics. Unable to act out globally or regionally. The NK on steroids is a scary one. The worst case here is that unlike the Korean state this China is to big to bail out with a year of grain shipments or a half dozen oil tanker deliveries. The US or other cant afford to subsidize failure on that scale.
 
After pondering this for a few weeks I'm unable to see if any of these scenarios are a net gain or loss for the global economy. Its clear some nations may benefit or lose, but what it adds up to is not at all evident to me.
 
Without cheap consumer goods from China to keep inflation down in the west, stagflation of the 1960s and 70s remains.

Without outsourcing low value added industries out of the US, not enough manpower was available for the knowledge economy America currently thrives upon.

Soviet Union might survive, owing to an improved relation with China, and thus depriving the west of a valuable partner.
 
Without cheap consumer goods from China to keep inflation down in the west, stagflation of the 1960s and 70s remains. ....

You don't think other sources for 'cheap' consumer goods would be developed? Thats a interesting outcome if it plays out that way.

...
Without outsourcing low value added industries out of the US, not enough manpower was available for the knowledge economy America currently thrives upon. ....

Does the knowledge economy use a very large portion of the population that had their manufacturing jobs out sourced? I'm also wondering here about the claims that automation has eliminated more low skilled work in the US than out sourcing off shore.
 
You don't think other sources for 'cheap' consumer goods would be developed? Thats a interesting outcome if it plays out that way.

No Way, I work for Dutch Customs in Rotterdam and today you can see a slight shift in the goods that are coming from the Far East. China is getting too rich for some very simple/manpower intensive goods (pottery etc.). Over the last few years I see more of these goods coming from Vietnam/Thailand.
 
Last edited:
What are the global effects economically & politically?
Well Mao died in 1976 so a chaotic China probably puts NK and Vietnam firmly in the Soviet sphere. There's also probably a huge increase in Soviet influence in western China.

One is the US acquires its cheap imports elsewhere, boosting other Asian, American, or African economies.
Chinese exports before the mid-1980's were extremely low compared to today and in this timeline they're likely staying that way. This will definitely be a huge boost in investment to other developing countries including South Korea, Mexico, and Commonwealth countries like India. Containerization is still in full swing and as shipping costs plummet, Western companies are certainly going to be looking elsewhere for cheap and stable labor elsewhere.

A second is the dynamics of international politics in SE Asia and pacifica will be very different.
I think we'll see this post-Mao stagnation/collapse as a natural extension of the century of Chinese weakness with the centers of power playing different factions within China against each other. It sounds a bit like the 1980's in east Asia are going to look a lot like the 1950's. The US and the Soviets supporting various factions, coups, and separatist groups in China. Taiwan may see this as their big chance for bringing down the communists on the mainland.

The main concern in the S China Sea being mainland based piracy.
Probably not a ton long term as there's still multiple powerful navies in and around east Asia including the US, Japanese Defense Force, Taiwan, etc. If piracy picks up they'll increase patrols to stop it.
 
You don't think other sources for 'cheap' consumer goods would be developed? Thats a interesting outcome if it plays out that way.

I think it should be pointed out Stagflation ended a long time before "Made in China" became a thing and most economic analysis that I have seen don't suggest it was a matter of consumer goods.
 
China was growing rapidly even prior to Deng, though I imagine this would stop eventually if China continues to be cut off from both Soviet and Western technology.

China not entering global capitalism has huge effects. First and foremost, global profits are going to be way down. China is a huge market both in terms of its labor as well as its ability to consume Western products. This means that neoliberalism is less likely to become as ideologically hegemonic as it did IOTL. The Western working and middle classes will be much more powerful than they are IOTL. Expect stronger welfare states to survive, more spending on infrastructure, etc.

The Chinese diaspora is going to be much smaller without mainland Chinese. It will be dominated by Taiwanese and Hong Kongers. This also means that other, non-Chinese immigrants will be accepted in larger numbers, though I doubt any one group will benefit too much. Somewhere that's really going to be hurt by this is Africa, which has benefited tremendously from trade with China, both as a necessary source of credit as well as a competitor to monopolistic Western corporations and institutions. A lot of the growth that's happened in Africa over the past decade or two will not happen ITTL.

Chinese studies in the West is going to be severely limited too. Access to Chinese sites and research has done wonders for our understanding of Chinese history.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Preventing Nixon presidencies might do the trick. It would be politically suicidal for a Democrat to normalize with China like Nixon had done, for he would have been branded as being soft on Communism.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Stagflation ended well before "made in China" became common. However, corporate profits would have been driven down massively due to the lack of an extremely cheap source of labour and of a huge market. Manufacturing jobs and operations would have been still shifted to other cheaper locations like SEA or India, but hardly on the OTL scale.
 
Top