"Fifty-nine percent of those polled said they believed China will become more powerful than the U.S. within 10 years" - https://t.co/3vN4I1TjwP ... I hate to break it to you but it already is in many areas.

When I published this work (originally from 2015) - https://t.co/GYOItA3StZ - I did tend to get a lot of pushback from US folk when presenting it.

Six years later, less so.
I expect China to start to tackle inequality this year. It's the Achilles heel of the West. We have no response, nor Governments with the required skill, strategy or practice to respond.

We will ultimately face a more advanced, more wealthy and more equal society ...
... as that example of what "is possible" / "good looks like" shift to the East, we will face a painful shift as we question our own values including our kind of democracy. But in reality, the problem is not with our values but our shockingly poor standards of leadership.
X : Is this because of Trump?
Me : No, this has been going on since the 1990s. There has been no effective counterplay to the long game that Deng Xiaoping started. Just hubris, arrogance and exceptionalism with annual Economist articles on "How China will fall".
X : What can the West do?
Me : Nothing sensible other than to adapt. Longer term, you need to get rid of concepts like the "playing fields of Eton" and revitalise leadership. Start with the whole "Me" vs "We" discussion. It'll be a long journey.
X : Do you think the West will do this?
Me : You can either do good and educate people or you can manipulate perception and behaviour. The latter is now so cheap (thanks social media), that we will probably respond with more manipulation and denial until it is unsustainable.
X : Why do you think this?
Me : Any discussion (including "Me" vs "We") ultimately will lead you to the woeful state of leadership. You're asking me why a bunch of "leaders" are going to try to avoid any discussion on woeful leadership? Because they don't believe it ...
... they get paid lots of money, we live in a meritocracy and hence they must be good. Or at least, that's what their internal logic will tell them. Inertia and denial are powerful forces.
X : I'd argue that even the supposed internet advantage is not so true.
Me : "Today", in that table, was 2015. We're half way through it.
X : How quickly can the West respond?
Me : It's a long game. You'd have to rewire education especially in the US. Even basic economic understanding is distorted through belief in that culture's past success. So, unlikely in your lifetime even if you set off with good speed.
X : What does that mean?
Me : The next hundred years belong to China. Learn to adapt.
X : What about the pandemic?
Me : China "managed" it last year. They're rapidly growing - https://t.co/rt18db5jW0 ... we're still messing around with not doing lockdown properly, failing on test and trace, not learning, arguing over masks and hoping vaccines will sort it all out.
X : You're not very patriotic,
Me : Quite the opposite. I believe that love is best shown by a willingness to have those difficult conversations and not by pretending that everything is great.
X : GDP is a dreadful measure of the economy.
Me : True but generally people only say that when they don't like what it is saying. If they like what it is saying then it's an excellent measure.
X : But is China's growth sustainable?
Me : Watch China start to "tackle inequality"
X : What about Alibaba?
Me : Exceptional economic play, mixed model with context. Hats off to China Gov.
X : West produce better corporate decision quality.
Me : I would look at Haier, Alibaba and others. There are only a few corporates keeping the West in the game e.g. Amazon which Western Gov's are always talking about "splitting up" because ... well, it's the daft thing to do?
X : How does UK fix this?
Me : How to improve our position?
X : Yes.
Me : You need to find your Deng Xiaoping. Your problem is that she is likely to be living on a council estate, trying to hold down two jobs in a pandemic to feed the family and you've got no way of finding her.
X : The alternative?
Me : Do what we always do. Pay some big name management consultancy or think tank to write a report.
X : Will that help?
Me : No but it's all we know. Long path before we can fix this. Just adapt and try to learn from China.
X : Inequality isn’t a problem.
Me : Oh yes it is ... https://t.co/F3lpviYBGc ... especially since we live in a system governed by luck and power laws rather than some form of meritocracy based upon talent and ability.

More from Simon Wardley

More from Politics

Trump is gonna let the Mueller investigation end all on it's own. It's obvious. All the hysteria of the past 2 weeks about his supposed impending firing of Mueller was a distraction. He was never going to fire Mueller and he's not going to


Mueller's officially end his investigation all on his own and he's gonna say he found no evidence of Trump campaign/Russian collusion during the 2016 election.

Democrats & DNC Media are going to LITERALLY have nothing coherent to say in response to that.

Mueller's team was 100% partisan.

That's why it's brilliant. NOBODY will be able to claim this team of partisan Democrats didn't go the EXTRA 20 MILES looking for ANY evidence they could find of Trump campaign/Russian collusion during the 2016 election

They looked high.

They looked low.

They looked underneath every rock, behind every tree, into every bush.

And they found...NOTHING.

Those saying Mueller will file obstruction charges against Trump: laughable.

What documents did Trump tell the Mueller team it couldn't have? What witnesses were withheld and never interviewed?

THERE WEREN'T ANY.

Mueller got full 100% cooperation as the record will show.
Here we go. Tag 4 des Impeachments. Trumps Verteidigung.


Es wird argumentiert, dass Trump nur habe sicherstellen wollen, dass die Wahl fair abgelaufen sei. Die Verteidigung zeigt Clips einzelner Demokraten, die der Zertifizierung von Trumps Stimmen 2016 widersprechen. (Dass es 2016 keinen von Obama gesandten Mob aufs Kapitol gab?Egal!)

Die intellektuelle Unehrlichkeit ist so unfassbar, ich weiß kaum, wo ich hier überhaupt anfangen soll; so viele fucking Strohmänner auf einmal.

Die Verteidigung spielt random Clips, in denen Demokraten “fight” sagen, fast zehn Minuten lang. Weil Trump 20mal am 6. Januar “fight” gesagt hat. Dies ist kein Witz. Komisch, dass sonst die Folge nie war, dass ein Mob das Kapitol gestürmt hat und Pence hängen wollte


“Dieser Fall geht um politischen Hass” Ich mein, ja. “Die House Managers hassen Donald Trump.”

So close.

You May Also Like

So the cryptocurrency industry has basically two products, one which is relatively benign and doesn't have product market fit, and one which is malignant and does. The industry has a weird superposition of understanding this fact and (strategically?) not understanding it.


The benign product is sovereign programmable money, which is historically a niche interest of folks with a relatively clustered set of beliefs about the state, the literary merit of Snow Crash, and the utility of gold to the modern economy.

This product has narrow appeal and, accordingly, is worth about as much as everything else on a 486 sitting in someone's basement is worth.

The other product is investment scams, which have approximately the best product market fit of anything produced by humans. In no age, in no country, in no city, at no level of sophistication do people consistently say "Actually I would prefer not to get money for nothing."

This product needs the exchanges like they need oxygen, because the value of it is directly tied to having payment rails to move real currency into the ecosystem and some jurisdictional and regulatory legerdemain to stay one step ahead of the banhammer.