A few notes on @TheProspect article on "The China Hack"

In general, it presents a critique of American political economy as overly dominated by corporations (including non-profits, that is, universities) that sell out US national interests (principally considered in the national security sense) for profit.
Much of the argument is based on US military contractors seeking profits in China and pushing the US government to allow transfers of what should have been obvious dual-use (commercial but also military) technologies.
The tone of the piece is harshly critical of prior engagement, but the policy recommendations are mostly limited interventions pushing for more engagement on better terms.
What the piece did not have as much on but made me think about were counterfactuals, especially in geopolitics.
It's a dyadic discussion--US & China--which is fine. But shifting the nature of that relationship, especially decades ago would have made a very different world. Europe and European firms likely would have been the beneficiaries with America and American firms less central.
1. The quick mention of the Soviet Union has the history a bit backwards--Nixon's overtures to China were about profits but also expanding US influence and alienating the USSR as much as possible, not a consequence of the collapse of the Soviet Union.
2. While I'd prefer government rather than corporate led engagement, one is left wondering about the course of history if the US ignored China. We'd have seen much more European-Chinese collaboration and engagement, with European firms coming to more prominence.
3. More tension in the cross-Atlantic relationships as Eurasia clearly becomes the world's core economic unit, even if US remained the largest individual country.
The China-EU trade deal that recently was signed is one sign of this in our reality, as is this German-Chinese agreement about standards. https://t.co/yChMLVxsw6
Corporations control too much US governance, including the relationship with China, which China came to understand and take advantage of. But if we did things differently, we'd have a different world.

More from Culture

A thread of very good, wonderful, truly Super Bowls.

Translucent agate bowl with ornamental grooves and coffee-and-cream marbling. Found near Qift in southern Egypt. 300 - 1,000 BC. 📷 Getty Museum https://t.co/W1HfQZIG2V


Technicolor dreambowl, found in a grave near Zadar on Croatia's Dalmatian Coast. Made by melding and winding thin bars of glass, each adulterated with different minerals to get different colors. 1st century AD. 📷 Zadar Museum of Ancient Glass
https://t.co/H9VfNrXKQK


100,000-year-old abalone shells used to mix red ocher, marrow, charcoal, and water into a colorful paste. Possibly the oldest artist's palettes ever discovered. Blombos Cave, South Africa. 📷https://t.co/0fMeYlOsXG


Reed basket bowl with shell and feather ornaments. Possibly from the Southern Pomo or Lake Miwok cultures. Found in Santa Barbara, CA, circa 1770. 📷 British Museum https://t.co/F4Ix0mXAu6


Wooden bowl with concentric circles and rounded rim, most likely made of umbrella thorn acacia (Vachellia/Acacia tortilis). Qumran. 1st Century BCE. 📷 https://t.co/XZCw67Ho03

You May Also Like

So the cryptocurrency industry has basically two products, one which is relatively benign and doesn't have product market fit, and one which is malignant and does. The industry has a weird superposition of understanding this fact and (strategically?) not understanding it.


The benign product is sovereign programmable money, which is historically a niche interest of folks with a relatively clustered set of beliefs about the state, the literary merit of Snow Crash, and the utility of gold to the modern economy.

This product has narrow appeal and, accordingly, is worth about as much as everything else on a 486 sitting in someone's basement is worth.

The other product is investment scams, which have approximately the best product market fit of anything produced by humans. In no age, in no country, in no city, at no level of sophistication do people consistently say "Actually I would prefer not to get money for nothing."

This product needs the exchanges like they need oxygen, because the value of it is directly tied to having payment rails to move real currency into the ecosystem and some jurisdictional and regulatory legerdemain to stay one step ahead of the banhammer.