The Chaos Theory

The end of World War II brought to the center-stage the true power of the United States of America. They were clearly ahead of every other country, and possibly all other countries combined. Ensconced between the Atlantic and Pacific, and blessed with abundant natural resources, capital, and attracting the best of minds from across the globe - the US could have gone Britain’s way and colonised much of the world that was in ruins. Instead, they ‘conquered’ the world with their diplomatic prowess, and in the process, global trade bloomed. Of course, whenever they had spare time, they would interfere with, and decide who’d run the government of countries outside their own borders, but who cared as long as the $ continued to flow unabated. Japan, Europe, the Middle East, and starting from the late 70s China, benefitted immensely by trading with the US. Of course, the US benefitted too - to illustrate, intellectual property was concentrated in the US, but the mechanical, assembly level work was outsourced to other nations. America became immensely wealthy, and so did the nations that traded with it. 

But as the saying goes, all good things must come to an end. And perhaps, we’re at the beginning of the unravelling.

Trump said “America is being ripped off. And I'll tell you what. We're not going to have an America in 10 years if it keeps going like this”. His rhetoric revolves around trade barriers that others have established, limiting or making more expensive the flow of goods from the US. Why should the US be the ‘disadvantaged’ trade partner? Also, the U.S. contributes ~15% to NATO's common budget and 25% of the UN’s collective budget. Trump claims that the US is the only country that’s upholding the principles of NATO, and that there are several inefficiencies within the UN. Why should the US be like the fabled Aesop's mule carrying the world’s burden on its shoulders when they aren’t getting anything in return?

Trump has been challenged - none more severely by Americans themselves. His policies regarding tariffs have sunk global markets, made goods more expensive for Americans themselves, and the country is now staring at a possible recession. Like several vainglorious leaders before him, he has doubled down on his decisions - “There is a period of transition, because what we’re doing is very big” he says. He wants to take China head-on - his VP, JD Vance recently said - “We borrow money from Chinese peasants to buy the things those Chinese peasants manufacture”. 

Maybe JD Vance doesn’t know that the Chinese ‘peasants’ drive in BYD cars (now the world’s largest EV maker by volume, overtaking Tesla), to their factories - manufacturing 30% of the world’s output - and return home by evening (or midnight if you’re lower in the pyramid and can’t afford the car; or never at all if you’re in Xinjiang) to order whatever they want on Alibaba - that can give Amazon a run for its money.

But China and the USA can afford to draw up swords against one another...

They are the world’s largest economies. China is way past the point of dependence on the US; I daresay, the US is dependent on China as much. To illustrate, China started dumping US Treasury Bonds causing their yields to rise, while Trump in his recent Cabinet meeting called Xi Jinping a "friend" and said “he'd love to strike a deal with China”. Not everyone can retaliate the way China did.

Imagine the situation of another nation. For starters, let’s say that this country isn’t blessed with abundant fuel resources (oil, natural gas); nor does it boast of rare earth production capabilities necessary to drive futuristic industries like semi-conductor, electronics, or defence. What if this country’s GDP is influenced significantly by the exports it makes? What happens if it does not have the manufacturing prowess that others do? What if its domestic market isn’t as vibrant - most consumers are happy with low-grade cheap products, or do not have the income to afford premium products, dissuading companies from even producing them in the first place (why invest in R&D when there’s no market to buy your stuff?). What if this country is struggling to manage its massive population - providing them jobs, basic amenities like healthcare, education, or peaceful coexistence. What if that country is us? If the world order is in a shirsasana, who will come to her rescue? 

The wealth we see around us has been largely due to economies cooperating with one another to increase ‘the size of the pie’ - everyone gets a share, and as long as the pie is large enough, everyone is happy. But we are now seeing countries tugging at their slice and protecting it at all costs - others be damned. If the pie stops growing, what happens to ones who are ill-prepared? What would they do to ensure that their race survives and then thrives. Would it rekindle the idea of Lebensraum? Even if this (preposterous) idea succeeded - who’d populate these regions? Who’d produce and who’d consume? TFRs are falling world over - if economics requires, would we discard the moral boundaries set by Yajnavalkya and Manu and go the Aldous Huxley way in his dystopian novel the ‘Brave New World’? And for all of this to work well, we’d need to protect the Earth from the ravages of climate change. 

Wouldn’t there by chaos all around?

All I can do is pray - 

ॐ असतो मा सद्गमय।

तमसो मा ज्योतिर्गमय।

मृत्योर्मा अमृतं गमय॥

ॐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः॥

>

Lead me from the unreal to the real,

Lead me from darkness to light,

Lead me from death to immortality.

Peace, Peace, Peace.

>

PS: I’m happy that I’m not an immortal in this chaotic world.

1. Shirsasana - headstand in yoga

2. Lebensraum - German concept of expansionism; territory which a nation believes is needed for its natural development.