Yes bro, the US totally has all of the industrial infrastructure needed to supply 100% of its own needs as well as 100% of Europe’s needs. The US hasn’t significantly shrunken its industry, the rust belt doesn’t exist and the Midwest is entirely full of successful union factory workers, and the US definitely isn’t disproportionately the largest importer of goods on the planet.
Clearly you’re just not familiar with hyperbole. I don’t literally mean that the US has absolutely no industrial infrastructure whatsoever, I’m being cynical and criticising the idea that the US will be successful in its ability to deliver the goods necessary to capture the entire European market for virtually everything.
Deindustrialising Europe for the purpose of forcing Europe to buy everything from the US will not work when the US cannot export anywhere near enough to meet European demand, nor are American capitalists willing to rapidly scale up manufacturing on the level required to even attempt to do so. This will only lead to Europe finding other trade partners with the capacity to do so, such as China.
Damn bro did you even read the article? Do you think the fact that European manufacturing is evaporating at an unprecedented rate is simply “market forces” or some nonsense like that? This has been a concerted effort over many years that’s accelerating far faster now than it’s ever been under direct pressure from the US government.
I basically already did. The US has been pushing European governments to deindustrialise their economies so that Europeans will be forced to purchase American products. A great example of this has been the recent constructed energy crisis as the US blew up the Nordstream pipeline and pushed European nations to purchase LNG from American sources.
Unfortunately, this is fucking stupid, because as it turns out, the US doesn’t have the manufacturing capacity to meet its own demand, let alone adding all of Europe into that, so it’s ultimately a ploy on behalf of finance capital to swoop in and turn Europe into yet more speculative investments. That’s been going so well here in Canada, I’m sure Europe will have a great time with it too!
You edited your comment after I commented, so I was only responding to your first sentence.
But again, your conclusion that "the US is “deindustrializing Europe” due to Russian oil/natural gas being cut off to Europe just doesn’t hold water. Europe took significant steps almost immediately after Russia invaded Ukraine to wind down their reliance on Russia for energy, because they recognized Russia could use that reliance as a weapon against Europe, which they proceeded to do. Russia had purposefully ceased output through the Nordstrom pipeline well prior to the pipeline attack.It was delivering 170 million m³/day prior to all this, then Russia cut the flow to 40m m³ by June '22, 20m m³ by July, and zero m³ by August. The attack that September was on a pipeline that was not even delivering gas. Russia was the one that cut this supply to Europe, not the US.
At the same time, European countries immediately stepped up to diversify their energy portfolios. Yes, they did increase their imports of US and Middle Eastern LNG. They also increased their use of lignite and coal, which are mined in Europe, and increased the pace of development of wind and solar projects.
In conclusion, 1. Russia cut Russian natural gas supplies to Europe, not the US. Ukraine just saw to it they couldn’t restart. 2. Europe is not relying on only the US to fill that energy gap, but increased imports from across the world and increased domestic production. 3. Natural gas prices have stabilized
Do you think the fact that European manufacturing is evaporating at an unprecedented rate is simply “market forces” or some nonsense like that?
I mean, that IS the reason. Governments which represent interests of actors in a market economy (i.e. The bourgeois) know how to exploit and steer these to their own benefits.
Market mechanisms are also for example the reasoning given for sanctions etc. Like when a ship can’t enter a US harbor for 6 months after trading with Cuba, why does the shipping company obey? Why, because they don’t want to lose a more profitable route, or risk seeing their own income under direct attack for disobeying.
There is no invisible hand of the free market. The hands on the levers have names and addresses. That’s my point. It’s not just magic that comes out of thin air at the whims of some perfect X shaped supply and demand curve.
High energy prices due to the start of the Ukrainian War and the European insistence on following in America’s footsteps and separating itself from the Russian market as well as normal methods of profit-driven behavior from capitalist companies (I.e. outsourcing) meant that European industry had a disadvantage in the form of higher production costs compared to their American counterparts, especially when paired with for example measures to saveguard American industry like the Inflation Reduction Act (something that was complained about by politicians in Germany, where I live). Add to that stuff like the Nordstream Pipeline, which was mentioned below, where there’s a strong suspicion It was done by at least pro-American forces to keep Europe from re-establishing Trade ties with Russia… or the additional angle of getting it to buy American LNG exports (might be a case of unintentional, but welcome effect).
Under a free market economy, if a company can’t profit or doesn’t profit enough - no matter the usefulness of the product or its position in the supply chain - it closes, relocates, downscales and so dependencies are created as well as oligo- and monopolies. If say Volkswagen and other German car manufacturers went bankrupt and Chevrolet took a dominant role in the market, it would be difficult for a new German manufacturer to reconquer the market share. It would be expensive, it would be behind technologically, it would need to force its workers to worse conditions, while imports would be simply cheaper.
Being unable to get rich from business makes the local wealthy get really angry, and support political views that promise to cut off dependencies and allows them to regain market share. Because they’re not going to voice support for a movement that wants to place economic sectors under worker control, you get a lot of support for fascism, which than turns even previously friendly relationships into competitive ones and possibly even Wars until possibly a new balance is reached.
Due to ways capitalism works, such as the way selling goods and services for a profit becomes more challenging the more competition there is (because there’s less people buying your stuff) unless there’s a way to keep expanding (which in the post-1990 World is pretty difficult… unless you’re willing to undermine the already existing competition), this is basically guaranteed to happen and historically the reason why the big world wars have happened.
Crises like the aftermath of the start of War in Ukraine only make the process faster for some countries (in this case, the EU) and slower for others (the USA)
I’m sure this will go exactly as planned for the US and its no industrial infrastructure. This certainly won’t drive Europe to buy things from China.
deleted by creator
You seriously sit there thinking the West, and the US specifically, has no industrial infrastructure?
Wait, what is this instance? Am I supposed to be in on some joke?
Yes bro, the US totally has all of the industrial infrastructure needed to supply 100% of its own needs as well as 100% of Europe’s needs. The US hasn’t significantly shrunken its industry, the rust belt doesn’t exist and the Midwest is entirely full of successful union factory workers, and the US definitely isn’t disproportionately the largest importer of goods on the planet.
Clearly you’re just not familiar with hyperbole. I don’t literally mean that the US has absolutely no industrial infrastructure whatsoever, I’m being cynical and criticising the idea that the US will be successful in its ability to deliver the goods necessary to capture the entire European market for virtually everything.
Deindustrialising Europe for the purpose of forcing Europe to buy everything from the US will not work when the US cannot export anywhere near enough to meet European demand, nor are American capitalists willing to rapidly scale up manufacturing on the level required to even attempt to do so. This will only lead to Europe finding other trade partners with the capacity to do so, such as China.
Bro, where is this happening?? This entire argument seems predicated on falsities
Damn bro did you even read the article? Do you think the fact that European manufacturing is evaporating at an unprecedented rate is simply “market forces” or some nonsense like that? This has been a concerted effort over many years that’s accelerating far faster now than it’s ever been under direct pressure from the US government.
Fuck no, this shit’s behind an unpassable paywall. Feel free to give me the Cliffsnotes
I basically already did. The US has been pushing European governments to deindustrialise their economies so that Europeans will be forced to purchase American products. A great example of this has been the recent constructed energy crisis as the US blew up the Nordstream pipeline and pushed European nations to purchase LNG from American sources.
Unfortunately, this is fucking stupid, because as it turns out, the US doesn’t have the manufacturing capacity to meet its own demand, let alone adding all of Europe into that, so it’s ultimately a ploy on behalf of finance capital to swoop in and turn Europe into yet more speculative investments. That’s been going so well here in Canada, I’m sure Europe will have a great time with it too!
You edited your comment after I commented, so I was only responding to your first sentence.
But again, your conclusion that "the US is “deindustrializing Europe” due to Russian oil/natural gas being cut off to Europe just doesn’t hold water. Europe took significant steps almost immediately after Russia invaded Ukraine to wind down their reliance on Russia for energy, because they recognized Russia could use that reliance as a weapon against Europe, which they proceeded to do. Russia had purposefully ceased output through the Nordstrom pipeline well prior to the pipeline attack.It was delivering 170 million m³/day prior to all this, then Russia cut the flow to 40m m³ by June '22, 20m m³ by July, and zero m³ by August. The attack that September was on a pipeline that was not even delivering gas. Russia was the one that cut this supply to Europe, not the US.
At the same time, European countries immediately stepped up to diversify their energy portfolios. Yes, they did increase their imports of US and Middle Eastern LNG. They also increased their use of lignite and coal, which are mined in Europe, and increased the pace of development of wind and solar projects.
Also that natural gas supply shock is over. Look here at a chart of natural gas prices over time
In conclusion, 1. Russia cut Russian natural gas supplies to Europe, not the US. Ukraine just saw to it they couldn’t restart. 2. Europe is not relying on only the US to fill that energy gap, but increased imports from across the world and increased domestic production. 3. Natural gas prices have stabilized
I mean, that IS the reason. Governments which represent interests of actors in a market economy (i.e. The bourgeois) know how to exploit and steer these to their own benefits.
Market mechanisms are also for example the reasoning given for sanctions etc. Like when a ship can’t enter a US harbor for 6 months after trading with Cuba, why does the shipping company obey? Why, because they don’t want to lose a more profitable route, or risk seeing their own income under direct attack for disobeying.
There is no invisible hand of the free market. The hands on the levers have names and addresses. That’s my point. It’s not just magic that comes out of thin air at the whims of some perfect X shaped supply and demand curve.
High energy prices due to the start of the Ukrainian War and the European insistence on following in America’s footsteps and separating itself from the Russian market as well as normal methods of profit-driven behavior from capitalist companies (I.e. outsourcing) meant that European industry had a disadvantage in the form of higher production costs compared to their American counterparts, especially when paired with for example measures to saveguard American industry like the Inflation Reduction Act (something that was complained about by politicians in Germany, where I live). Add to that stuff like the Nordstream Pipeline, which was mentioned below, where there’s a strong suspicion It was done by at least pro-American forces to keep Europe from re-establishing Trade ties with Russia… or the additional angle of getting it to buy American LNG exports (might be a case of unintentional, but welcome effect).
Under a free market economy, if a company can’t profit or doesn’t profit enough - no matter the usefulness of the product or its position in the supply chain - it closes, relocates, downscales and so dependencies are created as well as oligo- and monopolies. If say Volkswagen and other German car manufacturers went bankrupt and Chevrolet took a dominant role in the market, it would be difficult for a new German manufacturer to reconquer the market share. It would be expensive, it would be behind technologically, it would need to force its workers to worse conditions, while imports would be simply cheaper.
Being unable to get rich from business makes the local wealthy get really angry, and support political views that promise to cut off dependencies and allows them to regain market share. Because they’re not going to voice support for a movement that wants to place economic sectors under worker control, you get a lot of support for fascism, which than turns even previously friendly relationships into competitive ones and possibly even Wars until possibly a new balance is reached.
Due to ways capitalism works, such as the way selling goods and services for a profit becomes more challenging the more competition there is (because there’s less people buying your stuff) unless there’s a way to keep expanding (which in the post-1990 World is pretty difficult… unless you’re willing to undermine the already existing competition), this is basically guaranteed to happen and historically the reason why the big world wars have happened.
Crises like the aftermath of the start of War in Ukraine only make the process faster for some countries (in this case, the EU) and slower for others (the USA)