Dwarkesh Patel

What was the point of spending so much of GDP on the marginal nuclear weapon or marginal weapon system?

Okay, another question.

So Sino-Soviet split, this huge diplomatic coup where the Soviets have to put a million soldiers on the Siberian front against China, and they have to spend 2% of GDP just stationing and garrisoning this area.

Yeah.

which is obviously a lot.

That's often what many countries spend on defense as a whole, let alone just along one front.

At the same time, 2% GDP, well, if they just had one or two more years of extra economic growth or faster growth, that could make up for this huge diplomatic coup.

So again, this goes back to the question of, you know,

If some domestic policy just caused slightly higher economic growth rates, that would make up for the biggest diplomatic coup of the entire Cold War, which goes back to economy first, diplomacy second.

All right, you convinced me.

Bard is acceptable.

I'll stick here.

The subway is not a big deal.

I don't want to move to Moscow.

Okay, so while the Eastern European satellites are trying to leave the Soviet Union, this has happened many times through the 20th century, right?

So Hungary in 1956, Czechoslovakia in 68, Poland through solidarity.

And every previous time,

There's a many million person strong Red Army stationed in Eastern Europe left over from World War II, which rolls in the tanks and prevents these revolutions from taking place.

So what happens in the late 80s and early 90s that the Red Army is still there.

There's still millions of Red Army soldiers.