Re: We've got a live one here
Posted: Sat Dec 23, 2023 4:43 pm
Calculator, I would be a bit weary of Zeihan's analysis.
He's good if viewed more as entertainment about something you want to know more about, but there's systemic failings in his thinking. He said Ukraine would be a cake walk for Russia, but importantly he wasn't just some mouth saying that he backed it up with some thought through analysis, that turned out to be totally wrong. He massively underestimates human agency/will and massively over estimates impersonal non-human forces (resources, geography, etc), which is why he got Ukraine very wrong. Anyone watching the early vids out of Ukraine knew whatever it was it wouldn't be easy for Russia, Ukrainians were willing to fight so always had a chance even if the odds were impossible, it was never looking like a cake walk for Russia.
In that video he says Argentina will do well because of it's "geography and demographics". He knows technology means geography matters less than it did a century ago, technology has made the world smaller, but just ignores that and insists geography has the same weight it did (does it actually matter if Argentina has good agri land or even if it has no agri at all? if it matters then how much does it matter? Zeihan says "Argentina will do fairly well in the future not because of it's government but because of its geography ...", try telling a Zimbabwean the government doesn't matter and having agri land ensures success). On demographics he over estimates the importance of a younger population (but not as much as he over estimates geography, he thinks Africa's geography outweighs having the youngest populations), he basically thinks with an older population you cannot have a dynamic and/or consumption led economy, because old people don't spend according to him, meanwhile back in the real world in a developed economy earning power increases through someone's life. Old boomers are having foreign holidays every single year and sometimes two a year, go to a decent restaurant in London and see who the customers are it's not people in their 20s/30s (when Zeihan's analysis is that it is). The developed economy with older demographics can also attract immigrants more easily.
He states the "problem has always been Peronism and the government", in other words what the population of Argentina think. Well no shit, will/agency matters. The problem is he never includes what people think in his analysis because he regards it as irrelevant, when it's the most crucial thing. In that vid and in his wider work he states the world will deglobalise and stop trading, but that's not what anyone who matters is thinking or wants. He says in that vid instead there will be a world of blocs, but this is a sneaky move because he knows it's already a world of blocs and that's what globalisation always was.
If you take the opposite view to him, that what people think matters most and nothing is inevitable. Then it becomes harder to dismiss the Argie Refrys.
He's good if viewed more as entertainment about something you want to know more about, but there's systemic failings in his thinking. He said Ukraine would be a cake walk for Russia, but importantly he wasn't just some mouth saying that he backed it up with some thought through analysis, that turned out to be totally wrong. He massively underestimates human agency/will and massively over estimates impersonal non-human forces (resources, geography, etc), which is why he got Ukraine very wrong. Anyone watching the early vids out of Ukraine knew whatever it was it wouldn't be easy for Russia, Ukrainians were willing to fight so always had a chance even if the odds were impossible, it was never looking like a cake walk for Russia.
In that video he says Argentina will do well because of it's "geography and demographics". He knows technology means geography matters less than it did a century ago, technology has made the world smaller, but just ignores that and insists geography has the same weight it did (does it actually matter if Argentina has good agri land or even if it has no agri at all? if it matters then how much does it matter? Zeihan says "Argentina will do fairly well in the future not because of it's government but because of its geography ...", try telling a Zimbabwean the government doesn't matter and having agri land ensures success). On demographics he over estimates the importance of a younger population (but not as much as he over estimates geography, he thinks Africa's geography outweighs having the youngest populations), he basically thinks with an older population you cannot have a dynamic and/or consumption led economy, because old people don't spend according to him, meanwhile back in the real world in a developed economy earning power increases through someone's life. Old boomers are having foreign holidays every single year and sometimes two a year, go to a decent restaurant in London and see who the customers are it's not people in their 20s/30s (when Zeihan's analysis is that it is). The developed economy with older demographics can also attract immigrants more easily.
He states the "problem has always been Peronism and the government", in other words what the population of Argentina think. Well no shit, will/agency matters. The problem is he never includes what people think in his analysis because he regards it as irrelevant, when it's the most crucial thing. In that vid and in his wider work he states the world will deglobalise and stop trading, but that's not what anyone who matters is thinking or wants. He says in that vid instead there will be a world of blocs, but this is a sneaky move because he knows it's already a world of blocs and that's what globalisation always was.
If you take the opposite view to him, that what people think matters most and nothing is inevitable. Then it becomes harder to dismiss the Argie Refrys.
