Cold War II: Niall Ferguson on The Emerging Conflict With China | Uncommon Knowledge

Recorded on April 24, 2023.
Niall Ferguson is the Milbank Family Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution and the author of numerous books, including Doom: The Politics of Catastrophe and Kissinger, 1923-1968: The Idealist. In this conversation, we cover the conflict over Taiwan: why it’s a cold war, when it started, how to avoid allowing it to become a hot war, and how to de-escalate and even win it. Along the way, Ferguson discusses the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the role of the United States and Western Europe in both conflicts, and how we can avoid once again living under the threat of nuclear war as we did in Cold War I.
For further information:
www.hoover.org/publications/u...
Interested in exclusive Uncommon Knowledge content? Check out Uncommon Knowledge on social media!
Facebook: / uncknowledge
Twitter: / uncknowledge
Instagram: / uncommon_knowledge_show
00:00 Introduction
05:54 Is Cold War II worse than the first?
17:19 Taiwan: An American Suez?
22:15 When will the U.S fight with China over Taiwan?
26:02 Why doesn’t Taiwan spend more on protecting itself from China?
31: 51 Is Ukraine a distraction from Taiwan?
35: 55 Do the Chinese really believe in communism?
41:09 Can innovation really only be achieved through democratic capitalism?
51:25 Is the Chinese system attractive to the global south?
53:20 Why doesn’t Biden declare the American competition with China a Cold War?
1:01:32 Does America stand a chance against China?

[@jslberto]

Put this man in a chair beside Stephen Kotkin and do an interview that has no time limit or set agenda. Just let the conversation go where it goes. Please.

[@QuizmasterLaw]

Kotkin is insightful and intelligent, but at least regarding China policy Niall is one-dimensional. Wrong, as often as right.

[@themoonman-4]

They are both answerers

[@rbrookeb]

Yesssssss. I’d pay to see it!

[@JamesFitzgerald]

Yeah, my thoughts exactly of bring Steve Kotkin back on Goodfellows. Make Steve an offer he can't refuse.

[@MFJoneser]

@@QuizmasterLaw Maybe. And you’re describing any single person’s possible perspective, by the way

[@sjliu2007]

let me ask a question that was mentioned in the video. Who gives western the right to contain China's growth?

[@jollyroger1009]

Niall said it at the end: the US spends more on debt interest payments than it does on defence. And he also said that a superpower that does that has numbered days. The reason this is happening is largely due to a skyrocketing debt situation that is difficult for the US to get out of (save for a sudden wave of technological innovation creating large new industries in the US), rather than a plummeting defence budget necessarily. Britain got into a similar situation after the spending necessary to fight WW1, with WW2 finishing them off economically. The US seems to be on a similar path now, so given that this is the normal route of downfall for great powers, is there really any hope of recovery for the US? While Niall and others offer probably workable ways out of the situation, history shows that these ways out are seldom followed.

[@jima3129]

GB was out of cash in 1916. We financed the war after that because we did not want to lose what we had already invested. Then we sent 140,000 young men to their deaths, AND we ended up paying Germany's reparations to France. Talk about a bad investment all around.

[@dasglasperlenspiel10]

Peter Robinson is an unobtrusive but brilliant interviewer. Ferguson was at his best. Uncommon knowledge is a spectacularly good program, if that is not an inappropriate word for a program that merely consists of intelligent discussion about important current issues. I think it is very appropriate.

[@MrOkadaman28]

Niall Ferguson (like many in the West) simply doesn't get the appeal of China in the global South. It is not about Huawei, Infrastructure or Surveillance - it is about economics. Take Africa as an example, once the Shale Revolution took off in the US, US - Africa trade plummeted (as Petroleum accounted for the bulk of trade between US and Africa). Today, China is by far, Africa's largest trading partner - and you can't compete with trade with foreign aid.

[@SammytyLeung]

Foreign Aids just like a treat to a dog, you will have it if you behaved well. Besides, it creates corruption.

[@janstaes2172]

well said, if you want to look at the interview they did with the leader of the african union. they where absolutely livid about how the west was talking to them. its pushing africa towards china.

[@petercollingwood522]

No. The appeal of China is to the despots who rule Africa and need the ability to stay in power without those irritating Western concepts like human rights, rule of law etc being condiitons of their aid. Petroleum is only found in meaningful quantiites in a few sub-saharan countries. China provides a quick fix to their problems and they are perfectly happy to pay the price.

[@ivancho5854]

God, where to start? How about this: Good luck trading with China without the US policing the seas.

[@user-cy7ej4yr6w]

Anglo-Saxons never fail to demonize their opponent and try to claim the just cause.

[@michaelwoods4495]

I had thought that Hong Kong was British on a 99-year lease and that China took over when the lease was up. That is, quite legal and in accordance with the original agreement. Have I been mistaken?

[@schoocg]

Wish our journalists politicians had 5% of the intellect and historical background as this program brings to light. So well done and enlightening.

[@rogerparkhurst5796]

We were stronger in the 50’s and 60’s for the same reason China is today, we had a strong manufacturing base and could ramp up in hardware quicker. We also had a good brain trust and a youth/conscription that would support the country’s leadership/direction. Today, we have youth that rightfully questions our leadership’s values and morals/integrity and a military that couldn’t ramp up fast enough.

[@EllieMaes-Grandad]

"There is little value in ensuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it.” quote from JFK

[@JR-tl2ym]

Taiwan is on the other side of the planet. It has nothing to do with preserving American traditions

[@johnpruett5258]

JFK learned the hard way that the deep state runs the country.

[@Johnny-dp5mu]

Show the other two comments!!!!

[@madogsioux5636]

Latter day America has enthusiastically but perversely surrendered its time proven traditions. As a historian of considerable weight and scope Nail Ferguson should know this better than anyone else.

[@augustusomega4708]

why are your traditions paramount? do you even comprehend the quote?

[@kennethmarshall306]

There was no conflict except the US fearing that the Chinese economic development model might be more successful

[@petercollingwood522]

Bunk.

[@ArcherWarhound]

In discussing the parallels of Cold War 1 & 2 I would mention the space races. China's space agency is currently out NASA-ing NASA, pouring mountains of money and manpower into putting up rocket after rocket bearing spy satellites, explorer satellites, and components for their own space station, while on the US side SpaceX, which is really just pursuing Elon's goals and not US interests, is carrying the whole weight of our race efforts because NASA's traditional partners have all settled into a comfortable system of graft in the form of continued pay for endlessly extended piddling and tardiness.

[@petersipos4728]

Mr Ferguson forgot a few things. 1. Western democracies are in fact oligarchies. There is no representation for 90% of their citizens. 2. Vaccines was actually a negative example for the US. It pointed to having a lack of democracy. The US was not the first (Sputik was)...and had to strongarm allies buying it (while discrediting Astrazeneca in the same time). 3. He would need to look around his own neighbourhood. Most of UK suburbs are the most miserable ghettos on the planet. Those people don't get to participate in the so called democracy either.

[@pliniogoiania]

Oh, I see you don't really understand democracy. Let me help: 1.Unlike China, democracy can't make 100% of its people undisputedly satisfied with representation. Everything can be disputed over here. 2.Democracy does not produce those beautiful low COVID-19 numbers that China does. Our citizens did die in massive numbers and we actually know about that so we can improve. 3.Unlike China, democracy can't just erase people in ghettos. We don't really expect democracy to be that cool. It is like, when any random underachiever can make up empty claims against it on KZbin, without vanishing. Can't complain about that in China (or about anything at all)

[@anthonyandrew6725]

GTFO of here. That’s total crap.

[@ArcherWarhound]

In discussing the parallels of Cold War 1 & 2 they also completely neglected to mention the space races. China's space agency is currently out NASA-ing NASA, pour mountains of money and manpower into putting up rocket after rocket bearing spy satellites, explorer satellites, and components for their own space station, while on the US side SpaceX, which is really just pursuing Elon's goals and not US interests, is carrying the whole weight of our race efforts because of graft in the form of continued pay for endlessly extended piddling and tardiness by NASA's traditional partners.

[@FiveLiver]

3. He moved to America

[@douglasherron7534]

While there is some credence in what you say, I think you have forgotten a few things: 1. I agree to a fair extent with your oligarchy point, except, in the Western democracies the ordinary people do (sometimes) have a voice; as has been seen in the UK (through Brexit), the Netherlands (through the collapse of the Rutter government and the push-back against farm closures) and - admittedly to a much lesser extent - the US (through Trump being elected President). 2. While I agree the imposition of the covid vaccinations did point to a lack of democracy, in not only the US but virtually all democracies, the actual point made was about the development of the vaccines - which was a resounding success of Western science over that of China. 3. While there are plenty of miserable places in the UK, I guess you've never actually visited a real 3rd world slum/ghetto area. If you had, you would know you're talking nonsense.

[@charliebarton]

NIal mentions the Vietnam War and the divisions it created (notice he makes the divisions out to be the problem, not the war) and then Peter mentions George Kennan. I think it’s worth recalling that Kennan was against he Vietnam War, didn’t believe in the domino theory, and certainly didn’t believe in a global communist movement. Also, Kennan was against he expansion of NATO after the Cold War ended. So, yes, let’s remember some of Kennan’s points of view on these topics.

[@jaymudd2817]

He didn't want Greece and Turkey in NATO either.

[@futuresmkt]

An arrogant person considers himself perfect. This is the chief harm of arrogance. It interferes with a person's main task in life - becoming a better person...(Leo Tolstoy). Movie: "Fifty five days in Peking"

[@ambition112]

1:53: ⚠ The emerging conflict with China has turned into Cold War II, which is more serious and dangerous than the first Cold War. 6:46: 🌍 The US has shifted its attitude towards China and Taiwan, moving towards a potential showdown over Taiwan after decades of strategic ambiguity. 12:57: 🇹🇼 The control of Taiwan is a high-stakes issue for Xi Jinping, and the US commitment to Taiwan is becoming more important. 18:46: ⚠ The war in Ukraine is the first Hot War of Cold War II and Taiwan is likely to face a similar crisis in the near future. 24:42: 🌍 The US must be ready to contain Chinese expansion in Europe, the Pacific, and the Middle East simultaneously. 32:05: 🌐 China's Communist Party still holds Marxist beliefs and aims for communism to triumph worldwide. 36:36: 💡 China's innovation and economic power pose a challenge to the US, but protecting intellectual property and attracting talent through legal immigration are crucial for the US to maintain its technological edge. 42:57: 🌍 The Chinese model appeals to some people and countries due to its crowd control solutions and infrastructure offerings, especially in developing regions. 48:10: 😳 The speaker discusses the potential consequences of China becoming the number one global superpower and argues against it due to China's attitude towards human rights. 54:17: 🔑 The United States needs an external threat to unite and play better, and China is seen as the major strategic challenge. 1:00:01: 💡 The US needs to focus on buying time and deterring China instead of engaging in a showdown over a distant island. Recap by Tammy AI

[@jhbkuah]

Hong Kong became a British colony through two wars: the First and Second Opium Wars. The Opium Wars resulted in two treaties, each expanding the size of Britain’s Hong Kong territory. These treaties were followed by a 99-year lease in 1898 that allowed Britain to control even more land - a lease that ran out in 1997. China did not take over HK by force.

[@robert8431]

One can not expect a dog to change color! It is the nature and purpose of the Hoover Institute!

[@dictumfactum7784]

Right,ok china bot

[@fozzz-vb5oj]

Opium

[@28119850]

Thank you for pointing out the correct historical events regarding HK that this colonial-minded guy deliberately revised to fit his narrative that UK was so nice to help protect HK for 99 years and then return HK to China out of good heart. He is so delusional to believe his own bull shxx and as an echo chamber of the west.

[@2Hot2]

What's the difference between force and coercion, intimidation, threat of expatriation/abduction for violation for foreign (Red Chinese) laws, etc.?

[@jimluebke3869]

"An island-encompassing blockade situation" ... is an act of war, and the fact that we were doing that to Cuba back during the Missile Crisis was something we were explicitly trying to deny, as that would have been acknowledged as an act of war.

[@ace11235]

Tell’em.

[@jaymudd2817]

But not a Quarantine.

[@Christisking42]

Uncommon Knowledge is one of the few podcasts I listen to every time - great to see Niall back!

[@user-li2my9dp4j]

🤡

[@stQZuO]

I'm shocked at the fact that even such a high quality program cannot afford a stable table.

[@dimitrioskantakouzinos8590]

How the writer of 'The Pity of War' became a leading neocon will never cease surprising me.

[@constantquestioning4010]

US neocon money?

[@cheekhoonchan1627]

a former #1 world power advising a declining #1 power how to deter a rising #1 power a spectre haunts the collective west... the spectre of _common prosperity_ (Pax Sinica)

[@egverlander]

Your naiveté is exceded only by your ignorance of history. What a fool you are.

[@charliebarton]

In comparing the present situation with the Cold War, let’s remember that, during the Cold War, our leaders weren’t corrupt semi-literates, and our debt to GDP ration wasn’t completely unmanageable. How the hell is the US expected to wage some sort of conflict with China when we can’t even get out of our fiscal dead pool during peace time? We’re looking rather British Empire circa 1938. The difference is, in 1938, the British military was paltry compared to Germany, but their economy was immense. Now, the US military is enormous, but it seems we’re on the verge of some sort of economic or debt crisis. The F35 is unaffordable already, wait until the parts cost 2X as much because the dollar’s buying power collapses.

[@videre8884]

😂😂😂 Politicians are always corrupt and lie........ If something seems different to you today than it used to be, then it has to do with you and not with politics. Politics has always been deceitful, corrupt and an obstacle to real civilization.

[@EricFapton]

The F-35 will become cheaper over time.

[@EricFapton]

None of your comment is based on fact except we have debt. There is no indication the economy will collapse.

[@jinliu1198]

An all-out nuclear war would solve all your problems. The congress and the supreme court will be vaporized because they don't have the shelter that the president has. So after the war, there'll be no debt ceiling and the government can do whatever it wants. China is building its nuclear weapons rapidly. It may be on par with US and Russians in one or two decades. I think the possibility that the US president launching a surprise nuclear attack on China in the next 5 years is very real.

[@Anthony-jo7up]

China has 3x our debt to GDP.

[@waynecarney4519]

I really enjoyed this interview. A host who did his research and asked thoughtful questions, and who gave his guest the time to fully answer them. A guest who allowed the host to develop their questions and who addressed the questions asked. I want to see more. I specifically would like to hear a more detailed description of the issue discussed at the end of the interview. Specifically, the mechanics / details involved in playing for time. Regardless, many thanks for this.

[@dkstewy]

The interviewer just got the Suez canal crisis wrong by one year. It was 1956 not '57.

[@chrisgreene2623]

This is a very informative channel for conservative intellects that everyone of any political persuasion should watch; especially Nial Berguson a prominent and well written Historian

[@exhainca]

He's views are unalanced. To say that the US is good for the world is laughable.

[@bartb7450]

“Conservative intellect “ is an oxymoron

[@seanmoran2743]

He had a bias which should be looked at

[@seanmoran2743]

@@exhainca It could be if it didn’t involve Imperial Ambitions to control the rest of the world

[@shazzaz]

I like the way he says 'Hong-Kong was taken over by China', of course not saying that Britain stole Hong-Kong from China during the opium wars. Taiwan was alway part of China (except for the period of Japanese occupation), and is culturally Chinese. It's all very well for the US to occupy Hawaii and just take over Texas which didn't belong to them, but for China to take back one of its own provinces need to push the world into a major conflict.

[@jasonjean2901]

It's mostly a military containment issue. General Douglas MacArthur was ranting about Taiwan back in the mid-twentieth century, explaining that the U.S. needs it as a forward operating base to suppress the region. The U.S. doesn't even attempt to hide this fact, constantly referring to the "first island chain", which is their proposed method to keep China out of the world's largest ocean (the Pacific), as if they had any right to do that. But of course they do think that, they view the entire Pacific Ocean as their own personal lake.

[@djtan3313]

Exactly!

[@noelsplectrum9]

Doesnt the opinion on the Taiwan people count for anything??

[@k.k.c8670]

​@@noelsplectrum9 it didn't count in Catalonia, Eastern Ukraine, Palestine and even Scotland to a lesser extent.

[@pushslice]

PRC (and the hair-dye-wearing dudes in the party currently running it) have NEVER had Taiwan as a 'part' of it. Please, stop already w/ the fuzzy historical screenplay-edits. "Culturally Chinese" ? You're correct about that. but that's by circumstantial default.....unfortunately since the PRC/CPC has been on a cultural-genocide mission on the mainland for a few decades now.

[@bingosunnoon9341]

What do you do if you're weary, broken, burnt out, rootless and without hope? I don't know either but I'm pretty sure starting a war with China is not it.

[@B.H90]

not for average folks like us, but YES,,, for the politicians and the big donors ,,

[@thomashutton1963]

Russia is indeed all the things you say but I doubt they're planning to start a war with China

[@Juergen732]

Those are your words Bingo.. millions of immigrants are pounding on the door wanting to come in because they see America as the last best hope.

[@Zero-wu8sk]

我们甚至不认识彼此，为什么要和我们开战😂😅😅😅

[@martinlord5969]

I thought you were talking about China there until the end of the sentence, but apparently not.

[@JK-tr2mt]

We all live under heavily surveillance societies, whether we live in China, UK, US, EU, etc. We are really all ruled by oligarchies. Political ideologies and systems make little difference!

[@jorarch1]

Thank you so much for such a great interview with Niall Ferguson. He really gets to the heart of the matter.

[@fowchiiiliedpuppiesdied]

Here’s a thought, why not work on fixing our own mess, before we worry about the enemies beyond our borders? All the real enemies, are within.

[@Philip-bk2dm]

Who are the real enemies? Specifics please.

[@cricketerfrench7501]

No they are not

[@geocrystal]

You are very wise. But historians like Niall and other academics insist that the US needs a "clear external foe" to stay united. May it be a big bad wolf or great white shark.

[@mimiginkgo]

it can be and has to be done this way. war is like surgery best for removing cancers. besides, war can test how bad a shape each player is in and why

[@domcizek]

NICE IDEA, BUT NOT PRACTICAL, CHINA IS NOW THE REAL ENEMY, DO YOU WANT TO BE UNDER COMMUNIST RULE? EVERY WAKING HOUR YOU WILL BE WATCHED BY CAMERAS, WHERE YOU GO, WHAT YOU DO , AND WHO YOU TALK TO, THAT IS NOW HAPPENING IN CHINA IN REAL TIME, , WE NOW HAVE OVER 9 MILLION JOBS GOING BEGGING FOR WORKERS, THAT IS WHY ALL THE BOARDER CROSSERS ARE COMING HERE, TO LIVE AND PROSPER AND BRING BACK LIFE TO ALL THOSE DEAD AND FORGOTTEN COMMUNITIES ALL OVER THE USA, AND YES WE HAVE TO FIX ALL THE PROBLEMS AT THE SAME TIME, BUT BE AWRE, THE DEMOGRFIC PROBLEM IS ALSO IN THE USA, AMERICAN WOMEN ARE NOT HAVING ENOUGH BABIES TO STAFF ALL THE FACTORIES OF THE FUTURE, WHTCH MEANS LOWER SOCIAL SECURITY CHECK AND HIGHER RETIREMENT AGES FOR EVERYONE

[@welshman776]

I love how Peter always calls himself a layman, but he always asks the questions I never think of asking and I am for sure a layman. Love your work Peter!

[@egverlander]

Billy Budd had genuine humility. Robinson doesn't. He has an annoying equality seeking ego that gets in the way.

[@atato1331]

Common guys, these 2 are just fear mongers after a year they will be singing a different tune.

[@BR-hi6yt]

Peter is more on point that faffing Ferguson.

[@rodbutler9864]

Never in the field of human conflict, were so many words used to say so very little.

[@user-ks3bh1xe5q]

"China took Hong Kong"? What is he talking about? 😂

[@DavidDavoDavidson]

The way peter sets up his questions is great

[@jaysphilosophy1951]

Get off the guys nuts....

[@Namuchat]

No, it isn't.

[@simonnilsson5356]

Never seen Niall this dialed in. Looked like he appreciated the questions and discussion. Very good stuff!

[@simonepetruzzi9655]

😅😅

[@alexlazar4738]

Did not expect this much from Niall.. if he could have refrained from his usual tropes like "China cannot innovate" "Chinese want to export their authoritarian system to the rest of the world".... etc. It would have been even better.

[@augustusomega4708]

you've got to be joking, this guys scotch eggs are well and truly scrambled

[@blairrobert3438]

It's a shame Niall can't tell the truth about his own countries history, Scotland. He's an excellent historian however on everything else.

[@anhumblemessengerofthelawo3858]

He discovered biorhythms

[@vdove605]

Mr. Robinson you are excellent at what you do. A real treat to listen to your program! Thank you & your guest, Mr. Ferguson for bringing such an important topic now. Understanding what is happening in the world today is key! Thank you, Thank you! Cheers! 🥂

[@maxwayne9087]

My god what an enlightening interview, and that's coming from a Taiwanese American immigrant who's supposed to know these things. Taiwanese people are most certainly very well informed on the China issue, but some points that Dr. Ferguson brought up, no one is talking about in Taiwan, and they should. And even more thankful for Dr. Ferguson to set the answer right once and for all, on why Taiwan doesn't boost it' defense spending, looking like leeches on US military might as a result. The answer is a simple, practical, and perhaps a bit sad. The truth is that Taiwanese PEOPLE are not rich, a few certainly are, but wealth is certainly not distributed. The poor needs dire help, and even though they are not getting any, any political party in control understand that any additional military spending will not be met favorably at the polls by the majority poor citizens, when the questions of war, or even unification with China sometimes (or as self-governing districts under Chinese-rule), are still on the table. No country wants to spend money on defense when those money can be used for helping out citizens in so many ways, unless the people are convinced, unitedly, in an upcoming war, and the need to fight. And right now, Taiwanese people have not made up their minds on either.

[@WilliamFang173]

On Taiwan and China, I have a different view based on my personal experiences. I happen to be of a generation that has some memory of the tail-end of the 1970s, when war seemed imminent, but spent its formative years seeing rapid warming of relationship in the 1980's and 1990's. Things soured in the 2000's, but again improved in the early 2010's. So with that memory, my baseline is that both sides want peace. A continued ambiguous, complicated, but peaceful relationship is infinitely more tolerable than outright war for both sides. My view is short of Taiwan declaring independence, China will actively avoid conflict with the USA. That view is based on a couple observations. First of all, after the Korean War, China fully withdrew from North Korea. The US, on the other hand, still to this day has nearly ~30K soldiers in South Korea. Today China's oversea military base is countable by one finger: Djibouti. Whereas the US has perhaps over a thousand bases. This suggests to me China's approach to the world is not driven by military strategizing. That brings me to my second observation that China is much, much more focused on non-zero-sum economics. Since China's opening in the 1980s, its neighbors have largely rode the economic wave with China. ASEAN, for sure, and even ideological rivals like Japan, South Korea, ANZ, and Taiwan all have benefitted from strong trades with China. On the US side, it seems all of the US's neighbors except Canada have missed out during the US's rise. In fact Mexico lost >half of its territory during the US march to world power. So my view is China's global ambition is driven primarily by economics and China seems to pull its trade partners along its own quest for prosperity. Even Taiwan is a unique case. China shows no desire to "reclaim" Mongolia, which was part of China for longer than Taiwan, or greater Manchuria from Russia.

[@petercollingwood522]

China? Or Xi? Don't make the mistake of assuming an entire country will act rationally when in a totalitarian state it ultimately comes down to one man. Plenty of warnings from history in that regard. Just think of Napoleon, Mussolini, Hitler, Hussein, Putin. All of them embarked on utterly irrational actions that were disasterous and in hindsight make no sense. But it did to them at the time, and their individual considerations were all that mattered.

[@renatacaramaschi445]

China want peace .. but what peace ? The most fear of Xi Jinping it's that a sparkle of democracy will became to light inside Mainland .. do you think Chinese really care about Taiwanese happyness ? and their desire to live in a free world ?

[@allen8847]

说得好

[@wenyichen5515]

@@BaileyHorse I can tell that you're Mongolian. After death of USSR you only degrade yourselves from vassals to nobody. Before that you were also only slaves of Manchurians like the Chinese. See how history proved what you really are.

[@rohitkothari3890]

Chinas lack of overseas bases is not due to lack of intent, its lack of capability. It already has unofficial bases in sri lanka, pakistan, myanmar etc. It is only learning now to project power. In coming years, it will try to replicate US model of 1000 bases. Its already on that path. Secondly US is soon gonna force china into a hard choice. Fight us now or forever fade away. Chip embargo is similar to American oil embargo on Japan which forced it to attack pearl harbor. If china cant break first island chain in next 5 years, its doomed to be in middle-class trap forever. With horrible demographics, time is against china. In a few years India will overtake china in economy n china will lose global clout. So its now or never for china. Either it becomes the dominant force in the china seas or shut up forever.

[@robsrockinout]

Grim yet uplifting? Only Niall could deliver both complimentarily. Always a pleasure hearing this man's thoughts. Great interview as always Peter.

[@williamgarcia1909]

THE ANALYSIS OF MR. N. FERGUSON IS MOSTLY LOGICAL N FASCINATING. HOWEVER, HE IS INCORRECT IN SAYING THAT THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT R MISTREATNG THE UYGHURS IN XINJIANG. THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE. LIFE OF THE UYGHURS IMPROVED UNDER THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT. IT HAS BEEN TREATING ETHNIC MINORITIES VERY KINDLY N GENEROUSLY. THAT IS WHY 90% OF THE PEOPLE OF CHINA APPROVE OF THEIR GOVERNMENT. IF THE CCP HAS NOT BEEN PUTTING THE WELFARE OF ITS PEOPLE AS ITS TOP PRIORITY, HOW COULD IT LIFTED 800 MILLION OF ITS PEOPLE OUT OF POVERTY IN A SPAN OF ONLY 40 YEARS? ANOTHER INACCURACY OF MR. F. FERGUSON IS THAT HE SAID THE CHINESE FAILED TO DEVELOP THEIR OWN VACCINES AGAINST THE COVID. THE TRUE IS, CHINA EXPORTED ITS VACCINE TO THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES DURING THE PANDEMIC WHEN AMERICA N THE RICH COUNTRIES REFUSEDTO DO SO, BECAUSE THEY WANTED THEIR OWN PEOPLE TO BE VACCINATED. IN FACT, THIS WRITER, A FILIPINO, WAS VACCINATED WITH CHINESE VACCINE.

[@jeffreystone9895]

Excellent discussion...lest support our governments movements in these directions and create more of them...the regular person need to stop supporting the Chinese economy...if 300 million of us did just that maybe enough end the problem

[@cechzc2e]

Sublimely succinct, I found.

[@MikeHoffey]

Brilliant. I learned a ton. Niall is obviously articulate, and laid these world scenarios out with clarity.

[@thomastallerico6340]

Two brilliant men having a brilliant discussion. I enjoy this podcast. Peter Robinson and Niall Ferguson should be running this country with their civil discourse and intelligence. Uncommon Knowledge is absolutely wonderful.

[@wenyichen5515]

I fully support you. When this comes true you'll see how your country crumbles like USSR, not by an enemy but by itself.

[@peterliu2961]

Uncommon Knowledge is one of the few programs that get my brain run - love it.

[@buravan1512]

they lie to themselves...

[@cindymonk6994]

Thank you for exposing regular folks like me to discussions on this level.

[@TimL1980]

Great interview! I remember reading "The pity of war" in basic training in 1999.... the commanding lieutenant was surprised.

[@oxglowinc.1614]

Impressive, I love the clarity, flow and detailed analysis from Dr. Niall.

[@aymanfahmy7791]

Would love to see John Mearsheimer a guest on your program

[@dro355]

eesh no way, he's an idiot. He completely and utterly f'd up his entire analysis of russia and ukraine, Meirsheimer is just trying to revise history to suit his theory so he can try to have any relevance

[@FinnGriffin]

I was thinking the same thing.

[@tonysu8860]

No. Anyone who believes in John Mearsheimer's political philosophy Realism believes in a coming multi-polar world where only the 3 strongest countries militarily (Russia, China, US) count for anything and all other people must bow to the wishes of the competing Polar Powers. What kind of world is that?

[@ivancho5854]

I certainly wouldn't. 👎

[@aymanfahmy7791]

@@ivancho5854 you don't have to watch it

[@007.M-D]

Balanced discussion in its questions as much as in its answers. it is a reflection that insists on the urgency for some, and the opposite for others. So far there are a lot of "possible" including the best ones...Hopefully. Creativity will be key. On all sides.

[@matthewmmichalski8293]

Everyone in America should watch this and wake up to reality!

[@robertjosan]

Fantasic interview , please bring more attention to the China conflict with speakers of this caliber

[@ricktasker8248]

Niall grew a beard to disguise himself from the Niall guy who popularized the term "Chimerica" to predict the symbiosis of China and America just a few years ago. This current Niall guy now warns us about the coming Cold-war threat. And he does all this while shamelessly maintaining his know-it-all pomposity.

[@jozsefnemeth935]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/fYeUlIx-rcpmo8k In the last five minutes he talks about the dark clouds over Chimerica.

[@barryledwith6500]

Niall stealing Steve Bannons calls

[@micbear9334]

Haha, brilliant. I agree, he's a hack

[@ari8135]

He has obviously been turned. A turncoat. No objective academic this.

[@tomtang8067]

I totally agree with you. Consider Ferguson, in his white-centric but ludicrously ludicrous book Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World, this Ferguson who constantly blames the non-Western world for starting a second Cold War.

[@panagiotisbalaktaris7825]

Peter Robinson is great in questioning everything and Niall Ferguson is absolutely brilliant in answering! Amazing interview!

[@ari8135]

Peter Robinson yes, Ferguson? No.

[@henryterranauta9100]

🇨🇳🇨🇳Sorry🇨🇳One may call it Cold War 2.0🇨🇳🇨🇳For me it is just the good old capitalist COMPETITION🇨🇳🇨🇳China bankrupted Iberia with cheaper, good goods by using the Plate, Manilla trade in the 1600’s 🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳 My due respects to such a great historian. ✡️✡️By the way Israel is a respectable pioneer in arms dealing and crowd control stuff🕎🕎

[@jaysphilosophy1951]

get off his nuts

[@blackknight4996]

But the content is 3.0/10.00. The guest is delusional.

[@chrisrecord5625]

Was Robinson really that ignorant about Hong Kong v. Taiwan? The comparison, as Niall pointed out, was silly.

[@uncread]

Brilliant,brilliant,brilliant interview,god bless KZbin for moment like this!

[@gggg-xv7nb]

Very transparent and honest, and for that I applaud. It's all about preserving the empire and dollar hegemony. While there is this talk about China "exporting" authoritarianism and that being the reason America _must_ fight and win Cold War 2, that's mostly just propaganda to get the people on board. China has "exported" authoritarianism far less than the US has been exporting "democracy". Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Ukraine immediately come to mind, with enormous human casualties and sufferings as a result. Where has China supported a regime change or armed authoritarian "moderate rebels"? Pretty much nowhere. China just does business with everyone including authoritarians and that's where the charge of "exporting authoritarianism" come from, but that's just not true. Now counter argument: is the empire, dollar hegemony or the need for an external enemy for unity really worth the risk of nuclear Armageddon? The US can stay #1 without another Cold War, by doing BETTER than the other guy, economically and innovatively, not through war or the negative sum game of trying to beat the other side down. Make it a running race, not a boxing match or a gun fight standing waist-deep in gasoline. The problem, of course, is the neocons are in charge, and gun fights standing in gasoline is the only game they know

[@claudetterobertson4128]

The first World War was from 1754-1763. Most Americans know it as the French and Indian War and in England it's known as the 7 years war. However, the French and Indians in the American colonies fought as allies against the British. Other countries that were involved were Austria, Spain, Sweden as allies against France. The battles were fought on the Atlantic & Indian oceans, in North America, Europe, and India. This was a world war, but probably would not be considered a U.S. world war since it took place before the American Revolution.

[@sionnach.1374]

I concur

[@beachboy13600]

I disagree.

[@outisnemo555]

It’s not really a world war because significant portions of the world were not effected at all, especially China (and East Asia as a whole). It was essentially a war within the European system, with European countries renegotiating their power balance and colonial reach. Anywhere that wasn’t a European colony wasn’t effected.

[@HoradrimBR]

Not sure if included more peoples and lands than the religious wars between the protestants and catholics - that involved the whole american continent somehow, many important ports in Africa and southeast Asia, outside Europe, of course.

[@MrPokerblot]

Exactly. There was conflicts in the 1700 and 1800s in which the belligerents where from nearly every military. But it can only be called a world war when the real Indians are also involved and also the conflict is affecting the fronts of all continents such africa and The two wars in the 1900s can be defined as world wars Because there was no people or land on the planet that was not directly affected by those wars.

[@garbonomics]

Absolutely stellar interview as always Peter. Niall never fails to deliver a stirring and motivating argument. Cheers 🥂

[@ricktasker8248]

Yes, we need more 50-year-old backward thinking.

[@chokwoo5720]

​@@ricktasker8248 50 years is not long enough, Chinese look at history at centuries interval, in Potsdam declaration, signed by all indicated Taiwan is part of China, Okinawa to be independent or to China, but after the Korea war, US decided unilateral to withhold Taiwan as the 1st island chain for China blockade

[@dashifoo]

totally agreed, great interview, the flow was amazing.

[@davidermer1217]

​

[@DudeGuyWho]

We need to hardline the expectation that those we protect do materially more to protect themselves.

[@danielramon962]

Such an outstanding interview... many thanks!

[@clancyhughes]

Great discussion. You spoke of a nuclear threat during the Cuban missile crisis. I served during the Korean War, not so cold. You may not recall that K.F. Dulles negotiated against Russias further participation in the Korean conflict with a dozen Strategic Air Command bombers, B36s, fully armed with nuclear bombs, flying holding patterns just outside of Russia’s 12 mile limit off Russias Arctic Coast. Note how close that came to Stalingrad. Still classified, even scarier incidents occurred.

[@DieFlabbergast]

What!? Stalingrad (now known as Volgograd) is thousands of miles south of the Arctic Coast. It's only a couple of hundred kilometers north of the Caspian Sea! Were you thinking of Leningrad (now renamed St. Petersburg?

[@chriszikos3672]

No reason to clash with China... Unless one is prone to black or white thinking. Some kind of compromise is never discussed.

[@andsowot]

It's solely upto the population of Taiwan as to how they are governed and by whom.

[@chriszikos3672]

@@andsowot True, and its none of our business. I'm pretty sure the population there are ok with howthe things have been for the last half century. It's the US who is bent on escalating tensions. Niall pretty much admits this.

[@goodtalker]

My neighbor comes from a long line of Marines. His son and daughter have declined to serve based upon their race. (I'm sure you can image what that is?) While China amps up what looks to be an invasion of Taiwan, our so-called leaders have no clue. God help us.

[@fluffymadsquirrel5946]

USA and UK exceptionalism clearly on display for all who are fed up of this type of rhetoric.

[@lwty]

As Mr. Ferguson talked about market economy in China, take a little time to think about this question, if current CPC is a Soviet style or Mao-era party, why would they allow such a large scale of capital to flow in the system. If you go to a fourth or fifth tier city in China, symbols of American capitalism like Starbucks, KFC, Apple are everywhere. So what people are fighting for in this called Cold War II? US politicians say it is about democracy and freedom, as if the CPC gonna change the way of life in the West. Come on, there are so many issues on its own development, China does care about what kind of system other countries choose. And from ancient times, Chinese people do not think people from far way countries to be able to learn Chinese way of life. Keep the thought that China has inferior innovation for lacking of freedom. It is not a bad thing for the other side to continue to make false judgments if they really think we should fight.

[@tonysu8860]

Actually Xi is a return to Maoist leadership and a departure from China's other leadership since Deng (which is a weakness of this video's discussion that doesn't recognize this difference). After Xi took some time to consolidate his power, he did exactly as you said he didn't which was to enforce laws making foreign capital investment, loans and ownership illegal in China. Recently though, Xi's leadership has recognized the folly of destroying global financial relationships with China's failing exit from Pandemic lockdowns and needs outside financial help through its current difficulties. In fact, there's a lot that Xi's central CCP leadership is rolling back in the way of promoting nationalistic isolationism... The "3 red lines" is no longer being strictly enforced to try to get the Real Estate market going again, the Real Estate loan defaults that placed foreign currency bonds at the front of the line and restrictions on stock ownership on the Chinese exchanges by foreigners is being relaxed. In other words, absolutely Xi tried to remake the Chinese economy by killing off domestic capitalistic practices in an effort largely to gain more control and beat down the social and political strength of the wealthy but is finding that was very misguided and it may be too late to reverse the collapse Xi initiated.

[@madogsioux5636]

Americans are full of themselves even as their dollar is fit for the toilet.

[@lwty]

@@tonysu8860 CPC would not sacrifice prosperity to gain more control. 1. Sacrifice prosperity, e.g., more regulations and less market mechanisms, would not necessarily give you more control 2. CPC already have enough control, they don’t need too much more. 3. CPC’s grand target (and the underlying legitimacy) is the rejuvenation of China. So prosperity is a must and actually is the precondition to reunify Taiwan, while reunification itself would not bring you prosperity. The market mechanism is still largely in place in China’s economy, CPC is not so naive to jeopardise it. About foreign capital and ownership, you can go to any Tier-2 or Tier-3 city in China, there are plenty of Starbucks, Peer’s Coffee, Tim Horton, etc. And they are crowded with people.

[@kitirc8000]

Thank you for this interview! Great to hear Niall's take.

[@Mary-um9fk]

he should be secretary of state!

[@peterreston6478]

A better than excellent discussion of the China issue. Dr. Ferguson has captured the high ground of modern Chinese studies. His conflict appreciation is superb.

[@Kikochad596]

best interview I've listened to for a long time!

[@StereoSpace]

Niall never fails to impress me. It's a tragedy that no administration has appointed to the National Security Council, or economic advisors, or even made him Secretary of State. He's well qualified for all those positions.

[@Martin-qm2lg]

That’s probably why he is so effective

[@letdaseinlive]

He's a thug, which I mean as a depreciatory tag. The "Suez"-for-Taiwan bit was almost amusing.

[@mattjth]

Isn't he British?

[@AndrewBarisser]

100%

[@mariavm9178]

Totally agree.

[@christopherbettridge5983]

What a great guest to interview. I'm actually quite surprised upon coming across this video that I haven't heard anyone else having him as a guest. His books I have read are veritable masterpieces of exposition, by taking historical narratives about general subjects and interweaving detailed thematic analysis into the overall conclusions, with great detail given to the facts without losing objectivity in making his position; so I am very glad to hear from him on this subject and all the specifics and interrelated aspects of the modern geopolitical landscape. Intense and unsettling.

[@sarajezuit5]

So l a was ❤e CC❤wA

[@BigMathis]

56:43 America needs an external foe? This statement explains a lot about why America does what it does.

[@tyme5837]

whatever happens, please, no war by any parties involved, no invasion of taiwan

[@wankee888]

China is driven by optimism and positive energy...america is driven by fear and negative energy...i know who will win and who i know i want to win.

[@WWLooi-js8rl]

My religious teaching told me the force of benevolence will prevail in the end. And you know who the evil force is to human kind.

[@rcourtri2]

Hilarious😂

[@BaronTaiwanese111]

Pursuit of deterrence is pursuit of peace. The more mental and physical preparedness we have, the less likely the hot war will arise. Thank you.

[@rockydopeydoge6730]

The Joint Declaration over Hong Kong is not just an agreement with UK, it is an international treaty.

[@charleschen1408]

Prof Ferguson, your world view is 20th century mentality. 21th century is elevating into a different mentality, which is peaceful coexistence, mutual beneficial and win-win cooperation.

[@sateendra]

This is Satindra Chakrabarti in Canada. Migrated from India in 1996. This discussion is an eye opener. I just shared this with many of my friends, ex colleagues. Mr.Ferguson, I am sure authored many books touching upon major world issues. I am going to search if my library has a few. I am sure they have.

[@joekerr9036]

Another Indian emigrant running away from the poverty of India.

[@parnamsaini4751]

Accha?

[@intothemoat]

When a technology is made open source, it's available for the public to use and develop. That is not stealing..

[@rickvoit7310]

Peter, thank you thank you for bringing all of us such incredible talent and wisdom! Your interviewing skills are second to none. God bless you.

[@pjeng1]

Great interview and I enjoyed it thoroughly.

[@philmebeer5660]

Thank you. Great interview. I think Niall is right on point.

[@augustusomega4708]

thinking is fun huh🤣

[@donkruuz3903]

Love how Americans can always make things have that happy feel good ending even in interviews ... there is no going back for China, it's full steam ahead in their own ways. China is like the US in the 1920s just that the rest of the world doens't know it. They have lots of space to grow.

[@Eric-kn4yn]

Then why one China and taiwan

[@drscopeify]

Not true, the reason is that China is authoritarian so it needs to maintain domination over the currency for use with stabilizing the economy the USA gave up control over the Dollar to international markets. Today a leader of any country can buy as much Dollars as they want and then use the Dollars to manipulate their currency to sell Dollars and buy their own currency back. This is bad for the USA as it means that other nations have more power over the Dollar value than the USA does other in times like recently when the rates rise in the USA but these are short term events and soon enough power over the Dollar returns back to global markets. China cannot afford to let their currency become fully floating or they will lose control over it to international markets and players like the Dollar. Even the Euro which is the REAL enemy of the Dollar, not RMB it's the EURO that is the enemy of the Dollar but regardless, even the EURO does not just let anyone buy as much as they want. If you know how Euro works you will know that there are controls over it who gets to buy how much. No such limitation with the Dollar. The USA is probably more worried about the power of the Euro then the RMB due to the actions of France which seeks to counter the USA within the western sphere and while France will never match the USA it can try and manipulate Europe against the USA which is problem. I would dare say France is more of an issue then China. Why? Because China has never been a military power, it has never proven itself and it has avoided conflict since the end of the Sino-Vietnam war which did not end well. China lost some 30,000 solders in about 3 weeks of war while the USA lost 60,000 in 20 years in Vietnam, if China had committed to stay in Vietnam how many men would they lose? 2 million? 10 million? China is not a military capable nation and it might have some fancy new ships but it still isn't today. A cold or hot war with the USA will be a major risk for China that could destroy the credibility of the CCP and tear it down internally.

[@petersmith3953]

@@drscopeify Europe needs to up it's game to assist the US to contain China, the Ukraine war seems to have changed things , the Germans are going to substantially up their defence spending , about time too.

[@Bk6346]

@@drscopeify You don’t even know the history of the 1979 China-Vietnam War. Deng Xiaoping told Jimmy Carter and the Soviet Union who were allies of Vietnam that it was limited war to punish them for their involvement in Cambodia.

[@Saffsa]

@@drscopeify so False . Modernised Nuclear Capability of Today's China is Clear for all to to see bar the Self Righteous Arrogant . Its Economy is far greater than US despite Rhetoric to the Contrary . If China decides to take Taiwan it will occur despite the US and it's over Hyped Military superiority . The US has a history of meddling in the affairs of poorer Nations with weak military capability for the theft of resource under the guise of Democracy and sphere of Influence . The US is an Economy in Decline . A Declining Empire . China is an emerging World leading Superpower on all levels

[@PaulSmith-wz2xv]

Marvellous, looking forward to following the progress of the offsprings of Niall and Ayaan but this was a great chat indeed x

[@falldog9]

Such a terrific programme.

[@cabasadefogo9533]

It’s funny how these pundits distort the reality. Whether you like it or not Taiwan is the geographic name of the island. They call themselves Republic of China and claims to be the rightful rulers of ALL of China in their freaking constitution! All but a handful of UN nations recognize Beijing’s Peoples Republic of China as rightful ruler of all of china mainland and island of Taiwan. This includes our (USA) own state department. Those countries that recognize Republic of China. Recognize her as not an independent island nation but as ruler of the whole of China. Hence they can’t have diplomatic relations with Beijing simultaneously. If we are going to discuss the problem of Taiwan. We must first acknowledge all the above truth. The big question is what will happen if republic of China gives up her claim to rest of China and secede. Except majority of Taiwan ppl want to maintain status quo. While a minority wants to declare independence and another minority wants reunification. This is a lingering civil war that is best left alone to the Chinese on both sides of the isles to finish. Any interference will require a declaration of war on a freaking nuclear power! And I don’t want to see my family or earth die to protect the US hegemony in Asia.

[@tonysu8860]

On the other hand, the United States must always stand for a World Order that is based on International Rule of Law and among the various laws, the status quo after WWII was arbitrarily set as the starting point for any border disputes. Changes to borders and people rights since then have been by discussion, negotiation and if necessary adjudication. In all these ways, the CCP has violated the international law by threatening to reunify by force and acting intentionally provocatively threatening military force. Taiwan is not the only instance of China flouting international law. China attempts to claim maritime rights across the entire Taiwan Strait, claims the 9 dash line, re-drawing the border with India and threatens other islands in the East China Sea. China regularly sends organized fishing fleets that wipe out fish stocks in the protected economic zone of other countries. China's behavior is fundamentally autocratic with self interest and violates the rights of nations whenever convenient.

[@bill70545]

The main reason why Taiwan still calls itself as Republic of China and declares the right to whole China is that CCP will act aggressively if we do any amendment on our name of state and territory declaration. They will see it as a huge step pursing de jure independence if we change our constitution. However, majority of Taiwanese would love to change the constitution if China gives up using force against Taiwan. Also, most of us tend to call ourselves as Taiwanese rather than Chinese. By the way, ever since the democratization of Taiwan, every President of Taiwan has accepted dual Recognition between PRC and ROC. It is the leader of PRC does not accept this scneriao.

[@petercollingwood522]

If you're not smart enought to understand that there is a hell of a lot more at stake than US hegemony in Asia, perhaps you should go back and listen to the whole talk again.

[@shazzaz]

@@bill70545 Taiwan was a dictatorship from 1949 to 2000.

[@user-hc5cg3jc3i]

@@tonysu8860 Do you mean that China can interfere with California independence or American state independence?😂

[@MrBallynally2]

Yes, if you think in terms of enemies and win or lose this will always be the case. However, the framework being put forward us not based on hegemony like the current US global order. China does not have the military capacity and is also not trying to build one. Ot is vastly different from the kind of ground zero after ww1 and ww2. But, if the US continue on this path ww3 might be around the corner. Lots of fans of the current aggression towards China.

[@kevinjenner9502]

Yellow Peril rhetoric is part of public policy.

[@gotshot8355]

Great analysis 👍 100% agree

[@rumchjoe]

The war in Ukraine is a land forces war. The potential Taiwan war, will be a naval battle and also a battle with long range missiles. These scenarios will draw on separate reserves of weapons; the resources to support Ukraine's fight will not diminish the resources to support Taiwan.

[@jiahan3849]

Love the two at the end. Thank both of you. An excellent program.

[@blafonovision4342]

I think the Chinese are going to be a bit more occupied with finding food and energy.

[@jamesdallas1493]

Absolutely, China needs exports to pay for the oil and food. Invade Taiwan China’s exports to the western nations would cease. The Chinese leaders love the money from trade. They use one party rule so they can live the good life. The CCP will remove Xi from power within a year.

[@cagdasdirik]

This is an amazing discussion. Thank you both - very much.

[@mysterioanonymous3206]

yeah just go man they'll have a menu with pictures then just swipe that credit card man it's only USD 299. avocado smoothie is on the house...

[@gkumar8169]

How can Niall be blind to Kissingers policy mistakes that have made this cold war 2 so real and calamatious?

[@Ben1159a]

As usual, outstanding, simply outstanding.

[@QuizmasterLaw]

they're repeatedly wrong about basic facts, but don't worry they can't speak Chinese (but Chinese people can speak English)....

[@TheRealLanceCummings]

No, Peter. China did *not come up with some kind of new model. (~**42:00** mark) China was gifted a tremendous opportunity by the West to participate in the *existent* model. And because it had a population with a strong work ethic, and absurdly low wages, everyone was happy-particularly Wall Street. Happy that is, until the bet that the West made, which was: "If we help them create a middle class, they will become burghers and put the knives away", went bad.

[@kevinjenner9502]

Nixon’s vision was that of leading them away from the Soviet Union.

[@jasonjean2901]

Yeah, because that's what the west does, help countries get massive middle-classes. Seriously? China got to where it was by, not only having minimal worker's rights, but by creating a lot of Special Economic Zones, where workers lost almost all their rights. They toiled endlessly to raise themselves up with the breadcrumbs that the west provided them. Unlike almost all developing nations, they used these circumstances to build up their country into an economic powerhouse. Only an extremely ignorant person thinks that the collective west was benevolent investing in China. China, through the sacrifices of its people, made itself the best option for investment and slowly climbed the value chain. Now, as wages increase, that investment is going elsewhere, as everyone knew it would.

[@kevinrich5222]

Did the United States put away its knives because it became a bourgeoisie? When did the United States put away the knife? China's per capita GDP only needs to reach Japan's level, which is about half of that of the United States. China's total will be three times that of the United States, and it will become an invincible Godzilla. The military strength and political influence will also be three times that of the United States. The elites of the United States at that time would definitely not think as stupidly as you did. Do you think they would want to create such a terrifying China? Whether such a China is democratic or not, the United States will lose its hegemony and become a puppet of China.

[@paulwright2264]

The knives I see are all American.

[@CM-bi6oy]

Much mention of the Cuban missile crisis and how the USSR had to back down but the US could not impose its will on Cuba which continued to be a small thorn in the side of the US beyond the end of cold war I.

[@ma-lab5794]

Currently making history. Well done!

[@PointduNord]

As educated as this man is, he has completely missed the point. America is rapidly collapsing internally. No one even has to fire a single shot.

[@kiwigrunt330]

That's because half our population (not only the USA) are functioning as China's useful idiots. Not only China is (neo?) Marxist.

[@tonysu8860]

I thoroughly disagree that America is rapidly collapsing internally. Alexis DeToqueville also saw only chaos and lack of direction in the American democratic experiment. Those who believe in the principles America is founded on believe that the country thrives on progressive liberal individualism where every person is given an opportunity to do something with his life and for himself. There is room for discussion about autocracy, fear and discrimination but no one who believes in America would truly believe in things that bar opportunity and limit the right to vote and self govern.

[@willraley1789]

Whatever problems America has, China has far worse. Even if our young people are brainwashed, China doesn't even have young people. America still has people, even if they are vilified, who push intellectual, technological, and business boundaries (Jordan Peterson, Elon Musk). China only develops by stealing technology and ideas from foreigners. Even if America does collapse, which is absolutely not a given, we will still come out on top, because China will probably collapse no matter what, but there are things that we can do to mitigate our future problems.

[@nkristianschmidt]

subversion is the most important part of a cold war

[@grantperkins368]

The statement mentioned during the interview that went along the lines of "the Chinese have everything and America looks like it's heading toward some sort of civil war" sort of said it all, but was quickly skipped over 🙃 by these exceptionalists😂 , who would probably like to sanction anyone outside the USA who set up a supermarket as well, coz supermarkets are AN AMERICAN INVENTION GODD DAMN IT! 😂

[@godblesswilliam]

The greatest flaw in Niall's argument is the hidden assumption that people of China, Africa, Latin America and the so called global south are not and will not be as innovative as the people living in EU or US. What China shows the world is that by following their model of development, under-developed nations have a chance to get elevated from desperate poverty in just 40 years. Over time their people will become more and more healthy, wealthy and innovative just like how the Chinese people have become, even to the extent that makes the US scared and choose to blockade its front-end technology.

[@petergreen5337]

Precisely. Well said and well OBSERVED.

[@sebsebski2829]

They can follow that model all they want, but will the west pour money into these countries like they did to China? China is rich because of the West.

[@shaneusher2042]

Hi @godblesswilliam, I think that you may not have been listening. The innovative people come from across the entire globe, but it is the west that has allowed them to flourish, primarily in the English speaking world led by the largest economy the US. The existential threat to the west is that it is destroyed from within either by working age population decline, stagnation from isolationist populism or divisive and inefficient Cultural Marxism. A key driver for the future will be demographics where in the west, only the English speaking world is growing (partly through immigration) and the rest is dying along with China and Russia with the global south being the only source of native population growth that they cannot support because of ineffective societal structures. Though the Chinese threat is real today, the significance of the Chinese population will progressively diminish if we can buy another decade or so of relative stability regarding Chinese aggression. Russia has fully committed to expansion and China is preparing for war because the next decade is their one and only chance to prevent global irrelevance and societal decline. As for the global south, the only source of significant population growth, it lacks the infrastructure and capital to allow large scale innovation and is reliant on imported technology and capital to develop in the next century. The global south has stagnated (India) and often deteriorated (Zimbabwe & South Africa) largely as a result of rejecting the west. Though the Chinese support for technology and infrastructure is appealing for leaders of the global south, there is no evidence that centrally controlled economies are sustainable in their efforts to control their populations and sustain economic growth. The cost of Chinese "support" has turned out to be economically crippling for many nations with bankruptcies in Sri Lanka and Pakistan only allowing political leverage for China rather than fostering a long-term partner. In summary, expect instability and hope we can keep our hands off the nuclear triggers until technology can save our collective futures.

[@vincehilaire720]

At 33:42, my thought when I heard "...the Standing Committee of the Politburo is re-reading Marx and Engels" was "How do they stay awake?".

[@GuyIncognito764]

Wonderful interview. That wobbly table cracks me up though. One piece of set and it wobbles!

[@user-vf9it1gz9u]

The 'existential threat' to American society is really not China's rise but the loss of humble humanity in the minds of political scholars and policy makers. If you focused more on resolving severe domestic issues you would have gained more ground in the competition with other countries.

[@gervazejoseph9586]

Well put -- summarily so. You hit the nail on the head with a jack hammer. Otherwise, of this interview -- though insightful, thorough it is -- I nevertheless say Dither, Dither, Dither. These other comments prove but so many turns or rather hitherto stale views that the Establishment mindset has nurtured and dished out to the world for nigh on two centuries. In the 19th Century Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote out a passage in one of his essays that exemplifies this very blindness as regards the penchant for "political scholars' and policymakers' [worldwide] to run away from Truth rather than instead endeavor look more into their own lack; always are they embroiled with the affairs of other nations, Emerson saying "Thy love afar is spite at home."

[@xgguo3531]

The "American Suez crisis" event will benefit Asia ，Africa or South America, the same way as British Suez crisis event benefits the world and US. Niall takes the developed countries(US/UK) higher living standard as granted, but Chinese people are aslo working hard for the same or better living standard, which is not given by anybody. Deferring China rising means the damage of average Chinese people living standard, which will backfire Americans as we can see.

[@rogerparkhurst5796]

Scary insight that is too compelling to ignore!!

[@thiamhuatang5109]

Why does Niall Ferguson try to revise history? In 1978 when I was in a Taiwanese army camp, on it's wall it is stated clearly that "Taiwan will take back China and unite the country". So from the Taiwanese perspective, it is unambiguous that Taiwan is part of China. It doesn't matter what Ferguson thinks or says, Mainland China and Taiwan is part of one China. Ferguson should revert to a position of intellectual integrity as a historian.