graylion said:

I am mostly finding Zeihan absurd TBH

His plausabilty varies widely depending on the subject. 

His discussion 3 days earlier on the limits of solar power for example is perfectly cogent and believable (and sadly overlooked by the news.)

YouTube

Peter Zeihan - The Solar Power Problem(s)

For solar power to make sense, there's one non-negotiable component...and yes, it's that bright, shiny thing in the sky - the sun. But just because your plan...

These are generally the subjects I follow him for. 

I think trying to predict the near future vs general trends is much trickier. And whether ideologically or marketingly, he tends to veer toward the extremes when discussing geopolitics. 

That's what I've seen with zeihan too...

He appears to have some noticeable blind spots, one that seem to line up with the blind spots of western leadership wrt our likely opponents.

gatnerd said:

I think Zeihan is broadly accurate in many of his predictions, but I don't think he's infallible.

Certainly.  I didn't mean to give the impression that I was criticizing him for the apparent change.  I just thought it was interesting.

One theme that has not changed (in the videos I've seen) is the premise that Russians want to gain control of all the access points.

I wonder if that is merely his opinion, or if Russian leaders are actually so paranoid that they're willing to start wars over the issue?

If the Russians truly are that irrational and psychotic, it may be that the only way to stop their aggressive acts is to end their nation.

roguetechie said:

He appears to have some noticeable blind spots, one that seem to line up with the blind spots of western leadership wrt our likely opponents.

What "blind spots" are you referring to?

gatnerd said:

I do think the war is far from over, and we're likely to see much more fighting.

Two weeks ago Zeihan thought the war could end with the expected Russian spring offensive.  (4:50-5:05)

YouTube

The 2nd Holodomor: A Pending Genocide

In the 1930s, the Soviet Union attempted to crush the Ukrainians in a genocide known to history as the Holodomor. And now Russia is gearing up for round 2. F...

Not any more irrational than seizing Puerto Rico, and still keeping it, because the Euros might send a surface group to shoot up the East Coast.

Though if we said Puerto Rico is independent, the Puerto Ricans wouldn't like it, whereas the Romanians don't want to be Russians.

The extreme and most unlikely scenarios, produce the most clicks, though. "China will muddle through, but not be as important to the world economy as it's been the last few decades" doesn't attract a lot of viewers. "China unstoppable" or "China is doomed" does.

Farmplinker said:

Not any more irrational than seizing Puerto Rico...

I disagree.  The US takeover of Puerto Rico happened during a period when major powers were often waging war against one another, and it made some sense to have such a strategic outpost.

In the post-1945 world, major powers no longer try to invade and conquer each other.  Whom do the Russians think will invade them, and why?  Is there anything there that'd be worth the cost?

a) I really think they are that paranoid, they never eally recovered from the Mongols in their national psyche

b) he is missing ruskiy mir and 3rd Rome

graylion said:

a) I really think they are that paranoid, they never eally recovered from the Mongols in their national psyche

yea, sure, rapid NATO expansion post-1991 was purely Russian paranoia.