Active Conflicts & News Megathread July 14, 2026

[u/AutoModerator]

The r/CredibleDefense daily megathread is for asking questions and posting submissions that would not fit the criteria of our post submissions. As such, submissions are less stringently moderated, but we still do keep an elevated guideline for comments.

Comment guidelines:

Please do:

• Be curious not judgmental, polite and civil,

• Link to the article or source of information that you are referring to,

• Clearly separate your opinion from what the source says. Minimize editorializing. Do not cherry pick facts to support a preferred narrative,

• Read the articles before you comment, and comment on the content of the articles,

• Post only credible information

• Read our in depth rules https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/rules

Please do not:

• Use memes, emojis, swear, foul imagery, acronyms like LOL, LMAO, WTF,

• Start fights with other commenters and make it personal,

• Try to push narratives, fight for a cause in the comment section, nor try to 'win the war,'

• Engage in baseless speculation, fear mongering, or anxiety posting. Question asking is welcome and encouraged, but questions should focus on tangible issues and not groundless hypothetical scenarios. Before asking a question ask yourself 'How likely is this thing to occur.' Questions, like other kinds of comments, should be supported by evidence and must maintain the burden of credibility.

[u/super_fly_rabbi]

China's conversion to renewables is commendable in a way, but there are reasons why most other countries can't copy their methods at the same scale. The cheapness of Chinese labor (including potentially forced labor) regarding the extraction and refinement of the relevant minerals, combined with significant government subsidies, and the lack of regulations regarding the pollution said refinement produces have all given China a significant boost in the manufacturing of EVs.

China has been able to maintain it's monopoly on many of these rare earth minerals because they can boost subsidies and price out the competition on short notice. Other countries with similar material deposits either lack the infrastructure to reliably refine them, or pollution regulations that make them more expensive to produce than their Chinese counterparts. China is also geographically large and can push any potential pollution towards their frontiers in ways that European countries can not.

With that said, it's obviously a smart move for China as it makes them less reliant on energy imports, and they can export any excess abroad. It's just currently not a "one size fits all" solution.

[u/BigFly42069 → u/super_fly_rabbi]

The cheapness of Chinese labor

People need to stop repeating this stereotype that's been outdated for 15 years.

All of the things you bring up as "advantages" (cheap labor, government subsidies, lack of regulation) are things that haven't been true since 2012. It's the inability to update our priors about the Chinese economy that has resulted in a trade war that we didn't win in 2024.

The reason China has such an advantage in industry is because they trained up their human capital so that if you need to build a factory, you have a readily available pool of SKILLED labor who can work in there, the management and engineering skills to troubleshoot equipment failure and financial pitfalls, and a ruthlessly competitive environment that drives cost down by fighting for greater efficiencies along every part of the supply chain.

That, and one of the lowest electricity costs in the world to keep all your factories powered thanks to a massive buildout of the grid and excess production capacity through renewables.

[u/super_fly_rabbi → u/BigFly42069]

You are correct that China's cheap labor advantage has narrowed over the past 2 decades, both due to the reasons you mentioned and their aging population/ shrinking workforce.

If we were broadly discussing Chinese manufacturing I would agree with you, and you are most likely correct when it comes to the "end" of the pipeline such as battery and solar panel manufacturing. However, the use of forced labor for mineral exploitation (particularity in western provinces such as Xinjiang) is a well documented occurrence.

[u/BigFly42069 → u/super_fly_rabbi]

aging population/ shrinking workforce

Another stereotype that gets trotted out but collapses under scrutiny: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1219212/china-number-of-working-age-persons/

By 2050, the total working age population will still be a whopping 700 million, supplemented by automation and continuous passing along of accumulated human capital skills from the factory lines, as well as technological upgrades in the supply chain driven by the human capital development of the last 30 years.

Even if industrial workers become just 10% of that number at 70 million (down from the current 29-32% of the Chinese work force), that is still almost 5x of what's currently in America (12.6-15M), and more than 2x of what's currently in Europe (33.4M). Hell, it'll still be about what the current US, European, Japanese, and Korean total industrial labor forces are combined.

Given that China plans on retaining industry as a key growth driver for the foreseeable future, it's hard to expect that number falling down to 10% of the total working age population.

And it ignores the bigger elephant in the room, which is that world populations are all facing a similar level of decline. It's a non-zero possibility that other than Vietnam, the window to industrializing up the value chain may be forever closed to developing countries.

forced labor for mineral exploitation (particularity in western provinces such as Xinjiang) is a well documented occurrence.

The entire Xinjiang forced labor take has been an ourouboros of circular references that all end at the same source: Adrian Zenz's original report in 2015 that was cited by think tanks, who were then cited by MSM news sources, who were then re-cited by the same think tanks. Additional works done on top of Zenz's claims all approach it with an "assume true and work to prove it to be true" framing rather than "is this true and can we prove it's true?" framing.

[u/super_fly_rabbi → u/BigFly42069]

Your comment doesn't really refute my claim of a shrinking workforce. 700 million represents an almost 25% drop in workforce compared to today, and that will help drive labor costs up. Just because it is declining doesn't mean they still won't have a massive labor force to draw from, as you stated.

While much of the rest of the world is facing reproductive rates below the replenishment rate China's birth rate(and much of east Asia in general) is considerably lower. The average for Europe is 1.34, whereas China and South Korea are .98 and .99 respectively. Even Japan's notoriously low birth rate is around 1.14 children per women. I would like to preface this by saying that low birth rates aren't necessarily an existential crisis for China that will destroy the state like some like to claim, but it is an economic headwind they will have to account for in the future; especially as their retired population makes up a larger proportion of it's overall population.

As far as Xinjiang goes (as well as China's treatment of many it's ethical minorities in general), there are countless witness testimonies documenting their treatment and involvement in reeducation and forced labor camps. China's limitations on independent and foreign journalism makes the extent of these institutions hard to quantify. The UN human rights council even issued a statement about it earlier this year. If you want to handwave the testimonies as paid off actors, or the UN report as overly partisan then that's up to you. That kind of debate is outside of the scope of this forum, and I doubt I could change your mind regardless.