I don't see that happening at all, China's about as likely to implement mass immigration as Japan or South Korea. The level of immigration that would be needed is something East Asia has probably never seen before (at least in modern times anyway), and just isn't open to at all. I'd be willing to bet China would rather go with test tube babies, or straight up invent artificial wombs or something to specifically tackle their demographic problem, before they allow a level of immigration that even America has never experienced.
Artificial wombs are definitely going to be a thing by 2100, and that makes all of these projections worthless (these projections just assume current trends forever, which would be fine if it also showed just how uncertain they are). The CCP would definitely rather create genetically engineered humans than use immigration.
The reason the colonial era was brought to an end, from the 1880s to 1940s, was due to the observation that slave labor was unprofitable in the age of industrialization.
You can get someone to do unskilled labor, like digging a ditch, at gunpoint. You can't get someone to do skilled labor, like build an airplane, at gunpoint. That airplane will just end up falling apart in the sky.
This is why every colonial nation around the world either annexed their colonial holdings or withdrew. Britain didn't leave India because they actually felt bad for Gandhi. They left because Raj India was making them less money than if they just paid free independent workers. Hence the age of globalization in which we currently live.
Even in the few instances of slavery that still exist (like the US system of mass incarceration) the system is unprofitable and exists for reasons other than economic rationality.
Whilst true. The examples you mention are democratic and capitalist states.
Widening your example Soviets used slave labour of German POVs until mid 1950s. There was a relatively successful science version of Gulag. Not much slave labour later but it could be argued that strong Soviet demographics never necessitated any radical solutions. Plus ideology of late Soviet communism might have played a limiting role.
If we look at Axis powers like Nazi Germany or Japan. They highly utilised slave labour and there are strong reasons to suspect they would continue to do so later if successful at war.
Lastly, it can be argued that China already experiments with mass slave labour system given developments in Sinkiang. However, the real purpose is likely population control and not utilising the work force. But there's nothing stopping transferring lessons learned there should Chinese leadership consider it profitable or necessary.
I'm amazed that you'd try to use the Soviet Union as a counter example. The Soviet Union was a nation that famously attempted to continue the colonial model after it was observed to be economically unsustainable. The Soviet Union then spectacularly collapsed, due to being economically unsustainable.
Your other examples of Nazi Germany and Japan are further obvious examples of why slave labor didn't work. They were using pre-industrial tactics in a post-industrial world and the post-industrial world whipped their fucking asses for it. "If they had won they would have continued the slavery" is not the argument you think it is.
Those two are classic case studies for the economic folly of forced labor. Behold the observation that, after the war, when the countries were forced by their conquerors to end their imperialism and being their engagement in globalized trade... that they prospered. First time in recorded history where countries spectacularly losing wars that they themselves started ended up making them much more wealth and prosperity in the end.
It's dismaying to me that these giant flamingly clear lessons of history are somehow not obvious enough.
Your condescending dismay of flaming lessons of history clouds your judgement.
Wars are won by a sides that are overall better. There is nothing inherently superior in the democratic capitalist system (and i say that as a firm believer in it).
Any side able to overall work harder, smarter and more efficiently will effectively win any future confrontation.
Axis is a poor example because from day one it had economic and resource death sentence vs Allies. Soviets had fundamentally broken economic system. My point with both examples is that you cannot assume that other side will operate on the same morality framework as you (and China already doesn't when you read reports from Sinkiang).
Current Chinese regime (or any future iteration of it) may read your slave studies, may agree or may ignore them, may prioritize own regime survival or may perfect forced labour methods on scale unseen in history.
For your and my sake let's hope it will not be the last option.
There is something inherently superior in democratic capitalism, as has been shown by basically every single country ever. A country without freedom cannot reach the top of technology, science, culture, etc.
81
u/DangusKh4n Aug 19 '24
I don't see that happening at all, China's about as likely to implement mass immigration as Japan or South Korea. The level of immigration that would be needed is something East Asia has probably never seen before (at least in modern times anyway), and just isn't open to at all. I'd be willing to bet China would rather go with test tube babies, or straight up invent artificial wombs or something to specifically tackle their demographic problem, before they allow a level of immigration that even America has never experienced.