What political and economic power do Europe and USA have over China and India?

[Salem1]

What will the western nations use to keep their place at the top of the world and keep the rising easterners down? what are the tangible advantages? how are things developing? what are the weaknesses of each of these four beings?

* I'm not talking about EU. I'm talking about Europe as a geographical entity.
* I know that the relationships between these countries are quite beneficial, for example we get to set up factories there that practically don't cost anything to run compared to what it'd cost here. But we still want to remain the top dog in this relationship.

[Nimthill]

Simple, military power. They'll use the most devastating weapon in human history.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[bushbush]

why keeping them down? why can't we work together for mutual benefits? is really a war with the "eaterners" in the interests of Western Europe and USA? I doubt it.

[Dr. Croccer]

why keeping them down? why can't we work together for mutual benefits? is really a war with the "eaterners" in the interests of Western Europe and USA? I doubt it.

Already grovelling bushbush?

On topic

Military, economic and technological.

[Azog 150]

I don't really think there is all that much we can do to stop the rise of China and India, and I'm not sure why we would want to attempt it. The best thing we can do is try and better our relationships with them and just accept that they will one day emerge as the dominant powers.

[eran]

^
They will not become the dominant power.
China is strong becase it has lot of factories which is because they are cheap because they hurt human rights, just wait to revulotion.
India is not that strong...

[Magister Militum Flavius Aetius]

Almost Every country in the world has debt to china, the US hovers around 3 Trillion and Increasing. China could buy us out.

[Salem1]

Simple, military power. They'll use the most devastating weapon in human history.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

!

why keeping them down? why can't we work together for mutual benefits? is really a war with the "eaterners" in the interests of Western Europe and USA? I doubt it.

Why? because we dominate the world and are content with that. Mutual benefits involves conceding pie; an ideal development out of my perspective would be that Europe & USA gain indirect power over China & India, without the reverse also being true. A war is in no-one's interest but it's human nature to want to stay on top when you get there. Such is life.

Yes, I'm willingly admitting to being biased toward upholding the dominance of Europe. Despicable though it might be found, that's me. This doesn't mean I want to destroy China or anything like that but I want Europe to remain the world's dominant power and have heavy influence on China & India.

I don't really think there is all that much we can do to stop the rise of China and India, and I'm not sure why we would want to attempt it. The best thing we can do is try and better our relationships with them and just accept that they will one day emerge as the dominant powers.

All right then, but why not sure? do you realise what it'd need to sustain China and India were they to live in the same standards as us? more resources will be needed. Their rise as strong, competitive powers is what Europeans, Japanese & Americans spent much of the 19th century preventing, for the sake of our own interests. You can only have those cheap labour forces as long as the government remains stable. If China grows too strong then the west will no longer be able to project its interests at all when for example such labour would be abolished. That's just an example, you get the point.

^
They will not become the dominant power.
China is strong becase it has lot of factories which is because they are cheap because they hurt human rights, just wait to revulotion.
India is not that strong...

Why not? And after the revolution, what will happen then?

Almost Every country in the world has debt to china, the US hovers around 3 Trillion and Increasing. China could buy us out.

What swords do we have to wave in their direction to answer this then?

[Razor]

What swords do we have to wave in their direction to answer this then?

None. Pay them back, spend less, save more...

[bushbush]

Why? because we dominate the world and are content with that.

LOL, who is "we"?

1. assume you are talking about Sweden, your home country. Are you serious? Sweden is not even a dominant country in europe. It can't even assert much influence over its equally small neighbours, let along meddling the affairs of EU. Big countries like France, Germany, Italy, Britain and Spain pretty much dominate EU affairs.

2. assume you are talking about Europe. First, it is not even an unified entity. Not all european countries are in EU. Not all EU countries act as one together. EU is often fractured when dealing with world affairs. The whole Greece fiancial crisis exposed the conflict between big powers like Germany and France. Second, Europe's golden age ended already in WW1. With most of their colonies gone and economy in ruins after two great wars, USA and USSR gradually took over as the superpowers. As the cold war ended and developing world begin to rise, even US' dominance is fading as india, china, russia, brazil, turkey and other major powers begin to assert themselves. Their GDP contributoin to the world already rose substantially, so are their influence. Europe's debt crisis this time exposed itself as stagnant economically and disunited politically. When european cheered with relief that China did not dump their currency, they effectively admited that they no longer dominate anyone. They can hardly manage their own affairs.

3. if you are talking about the so called "west", there is never an united West as a sovernign entity. USA has been dominating Europe's economy (with marshal plan after ww2) and politics (with NATO) since ww2. Europe relied on the americans for security against USSR. Today, europeans are just following the footsteps of americans largely in world affairs, fighting along the americans in afganistan (while from time to time moaning that americans don't give them much respect on key decisions). Is that the WEST you are talking about? Becaues it is certainly not a country like India, China and other powers.

In the end, these BS east vs west debate is old generalizatoin crap like white vs other race, civilized vs uncivilized, etc. it simplifies things to such extent that you become confused on the basic reality of world affairs. For example, you somehow include tiny little sweden into the group that dominates the world whil ein reality sweden has almost no influence outside of its immediate sphere. I dont think this sort of thread helps us to understand the world.

And if we are actually discussing about countries that actually matter to the world, i will go back to what i said, cooperating is the only option. Conflict will destroy us all. Trying to surpress other countries will only bring destruction to yourself. The world eocnomy is too inderdependent now to say "we don't want you to get rich while we still want to sustain our own growth". Keep that in mind.

[Salem1]

LOL, who is "we"?

1. assume you are talking about Sweden, your home country. Are you serious? Sweden is not even a dominant country in europe. It can't even assert much influence over its equally small neighbours, let along meddling the affairs of EU. Big countries like France, Germany, Italy, Britain and Spain pretty much dominate EU affairs.

2. assume you are talking about Europe. First, it is not even an unified entity. Not all european countries are in EU. Not all EU countries act as one together. EU is often fractured when dealing with world affairs. The whole Greece fiancial crisis exposed the conflict between big powers like Germany and France. Second, Europe's golden age ended already in WW1. With most of their colonies gone and economy in ruins after two great wars, USA and USSR gradually took over as the superpowers. As the cold war ended and developing world begin to rise, even US' dominance is fading as india, china, russia, brazil, turkey and other major powers begin to assert themselves. Their GDP contributoin to the world already rose substantially, so are their influence. Europe's debt crisis this time exposed itself as stagnant economically and disunited politically. When european cheered with relief that China did not dump their currency, they effectively admited that they no longer dominate anyone. They can hardly manage their own affairs.

3. if you are talking about the so called "west", there is never an united West as a sovernign entity. USA has been dominating Europe's economy (with marshal plan after ww2) and politics (with NATO) since ww2. Europe relied on the americans for security against USSR. Today, europeans are just following the footsteps of americans largely in world affairs, fighting along the americans in afganistan (while from time to time moaning that americans don't give them much respect on key decisions). Is that the WEST you are talking about? Becaues it is certainly not a country like India, China and other powers.

In the end, these BS east vs west debate is old generalizatoin crap like white vs other race, civilized vs uncivilized, etc. it simplifies things to such extent that you become confused on the basic reality of world affairs. For example, you somehow include tiny little sweden into the group that dominates the world whil ein reality sweden has almost no influence outside of its immediate sphere. I dont think this sort of thread helps us to understand the world.

And if we are actually discussing about countries that actually matter to the world, i will go back to what i said, cooperating is the only option. Conflict will destroy us all. Trying to surpress other countries will only bring destruction to yourself. The world eocnomy is too inderdependent now to say "we don't want you to get rich while we still want to sustain our own growth". Keep that in mind.

1. I already told you - ''we'' is Europe and also USA.

2. Yes this is exactly what I'm saying and why I created this thread.

3. USA ''dominating'' Europe like that since WW2? USA helped us rebuild and that's about it, NATO has no sway over us. USA won't and doesn't threaten Europe because USA doesn't have that kind of power over Europe and it's just not in USA's interest. And yes I don't like following in USA's footsteps either...

But in today's world you don't need war, soft power is much more powerful than war and that's what allows Europe to compete even though it's not a unified entity. And my dad is from Gambia, I'm half-african, this is not about ethnicity or civilized vs uncivilized... this is about what Europeans and everyone else have done since they learned to throw rocks at eachother - compete with other nations. That you bring up Sweden allows me to make a point, alone Sweden is weak but together with the other European nations, Sweden can pool its resources to create something stronger. But without competition there is no drive to go forward which leads to stagnance, I thought China's history already proved this to you.

Conflict doesn't mean you have to destroy one another but yeah, I can comfortably say I'd like Europe (ie. my home territory) to remain the dominant soft power in the world. There is no ''yellow terror'' crap in my thoughts, this is the reality of competition.

[bushbush]

[QUOTE=Salem1;7717240]1. I already told you - ''we'' is Europe and also USA.

2. Yes this is exactly what I'm saying and why I created this thread./QUOTE]

Read this carefully.

"2. assume you are talking about Europe. First, it is not even an unified entity. Not all european countries are in EU. Not all EU countries act as one together. EU is often fractured when dealing with world affairs. The whole Greece fiancial crisis exposed the conflict between big powers like Germany and France. Second, Europe's golden age ended already in WW1. With most of their colonies gone and economy in ruins after two great wars, USA and USSR gradually took over as the superpowers. As the cold war ended and developing world begin to rise, even US' dominance is fading as india, china, russia, brazil, turkey and other major powers begin to assert themselves. Their GDP contributoin to the world already rose substantially, so are their influence. Europe's debt crisis this time exposed itself as stagnant economically and disunited politically. When european cheered with relief that China did not dump their currency, they effectively admited that they no longer dominate anyone. They can hardly manage their own affairs."

Don't be lazy. Show me where exactly is Europe dominating today? The biggest story this year is how crappy european economy has become thanks to the inefficient southern and eastern european economies that also rack up a lot of debt. And EU is struggling to deal even with that as an unit, begging help from the Americans, the Chinese and the IMF to not abandon their currency and effectively send europe into another long recession. How is that dominant?

In other areas such as trade, science, military, culture, Europe also no longer has overwhelming power against other parts of the world. US takes the lead in most areas. China, india, russia, brazil and other key developing countries play the roles of great powers. Individual european big powers are also in the mix. But the rest of european countries, especially little ones like Sweden, practically just follows the orders from the big players. When was the last time countries like Sweden made a difference individually in any important world affairs? even today, in world's most hot spots, europeans don't play the most importnat role. In iraq? no. In Afganistan? they follow the americans. In east asia, it is china, japan, korea and USA. In middle east, it is USA. Even in africa, it is China increasingly slipping in, replacing the waning influence of the former imperailist powers in europe. So where exactly europe is dominating today?

you said soft power, what exactly are you talking about? just words? Europe is not even dominating in printing out diplomatic statements, any country can do that.

and you still can't explain to me how exactly a disunited europe can function as one entity as other major powers.

Read this article written by your fellow "european".

http://www.economist.com/node/14742316

Europe is increasingly just a museum, except for the major powers like france, italy, germany, britain and perhaps spain.

But in today's world you don't need war, soft power is much more powerful than war and that's what allows Europe to compete even though it's not a unified entity. ...this is the reality of competition.

LOL don't you see the irony here? you are talking about soft power. I listed all the key soft power apects (economy, trade, culture, science), europe is not the most dominat in any that area as a whole (assuming it even acts as one in key aspects). and you are talking about "reality of competition" to me? Where is the reality? it is still money and military power. EU is short on money with its debt crisis and it is reluctnat to spend money on military or use it anywhere. So it has effectively very little power to project. Face it, today's world is multipolar. US still leads the world, but it is only first among equal.

[removeduser_4536284751384]

Those two countries will get richer and richer and that's a good thing

[Salem1]

Those two countries will get richer and richer and that's a good thing

Yes, if it serves us...

[removeduser_4536284751384]

Yes, if it serves us...

no, if it serves everyone

[Exarch]

What will the western nations use to keep their place at the top of the world and keep the rising easterners down? what are the tangible advantages? how are things developing? what are the weaknesses of each of these four beings?

* I'm not talking about EU. I'm talking about Europe as a geographical entity.
* I know that the relationships between these countries are quite beneficial, for example we get to set up factories there that practically don't cost anything to run compared to what it'd cost here. But we still want to remain the top dog in this relationship.

political and economic power?
depends on which 'western nation' you're referring to;

france still keeps its colonial interests in africa, ensured by its own foreign legion and insuring africa's mineral wealth goes to france and/or the EU

Why? because we dominate the world and are content with that. Mutual benefits involves conceding pie; an ideal development out of my perspective would be that Europe & USA gain indirect power over China & India, without the reverse also being true. A war is in no-one's interest but it's human nature to want to stay on top when you get there. Such is life.

Yes, I'm willingly admitting to being biased toward upholding the dominance of Europe. Despicable though it might be found, that's me. This doesn't mean I want to destroy China or anything like that but I want Europe to remain the world's dominant power and have heavy influence on China & India.

well i've got to ask, what rational reason do you have for a fear of change? or more pointedly, a fear of power moving east?

[Salem1]

well i've got to ask, what rational reason do you have for a fear of change? or more pointedly, a fear of power moving east?

Fear? nah. Suspicions? yes. I don't fear change at all. I just don't like the idea of not being the foremost power in the world.

[removeduser_4536284751384]

Fear? nah. Suspicions? yes. I don't fear change at all. I just don't like the idea of not being the foremost power in the world.

you aren't

[charles the hammer]

you aren't

Sure someones delusional.

[removeduser_4536284751384]

Sure someones delusional.

last I checked Sweden was an exporter of electronic devices and engineering solutions with a conscript army incapable of operating aboard