news
Welcome to c/news! We aim to foster a book-club type environment for discussion and critical analysis of the news. Our policy objectives are:
-
To learn about and discuss meaningful news, analysis and perspectives from around the world, with a focus on news outside the Anglosphere and beyond what is normally seen in corporate media (e.g. anti-imperialist, anti-Zionist, Marxist, Indigenous, LGBTQ, people of colour).
-
To encourage community members to contribute commentary and for others to thoughtfully engage with this material.
-
To support healthy and good faith discussion as comrades, sharpening our analytical skills and helping one another better understand geopolitics.
We ask community members to appreciate the uncertainty inherent in critical analysis of current events, the need to constantly learn, and take part in the community with humility. None of us are the One True Leftist, not even you, the reader.
Newcomm and Newsmega Rules:
The Hexbear Code of Conduct and Terms of Service apply here.
-
Link titles: Please use informative link titles. Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed.
-
Content warnings: Posts on the newscomm and top-level replies on the newsmega should use content warnings appropriately. Please be thoughtful about wording and triggers when describing awful things in post titles.
-
Fake news: No fake news posts ever, including April 1st. Deliberate fake news posting is a bannable offense. If you mistakenly post fake news the mod team may ask you to delete/modify the post or we may delete it ourselves.
-
Link sources: All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. If you are citing a Twitter post as news, please include the Xcancel.com (or another Nitter instance) or at least strip out identifier information from the twitter link. There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance, such as Libredirect or archive them as you would any other reactionary source.
-
Archive sites: We highly encourage use of non-paywalled archive sites (i.e. archive.is, web.archive.org, ghostarchive.org) so that links are widely accessible to the community and so that reactionary sources don’t derive data/ad revenue from Hexbear users. If you see a link without an archive link, please archive it yourself and add it to the thread, ask the OP to fix it, or report to mods. Including text of articles in threads is welcome.
-
Low effort material: Avoid memes/jokes/shitposts in newscomm posts and top-level replies to the newsmega. This kind of content is OK in post replies and in newsmega sub-threads. We encourage the community to balance their contribution of low effort material with effort posts, links to real news/analysis, and meaningful engagement with material posted in the community.
-
American politics: Discussion and effort posts on the (potential) material impacts of American electoral politics is welcome, but the never-ending circus of American Politics© Brought to You by Mountain Dew™ is not welcome. This refers to polling, pundit reactions, electoral horse races, rumors of who might run, etc.
-
Electoralism: Please try to avoid struggle sessions about the value of voting/taking part in the electoral system in the West. c/electoralism is right over there.
-
AI Slop: Don't post AI generated content. Posts about AI race/chip wars/data centers are fine.
view the rest of the comments
Holy shit, that's fucking wild. Got a source? Not that I doubt you, if anyone could do that it's china, but... Holy shit.
I don't think that's accurate, the PLAN had 8 Type 055s built in 4 years, and another 8 on the way in the same timespan. The USN in WW2 had over 100 cruisers built.
If we're talking about potential though, Chinese shipbuilding capacity dwarfs the US, and in a hypothetical war scenario (that somehow doesn't turn nuclear) with full wartime production the gap widens more. However I expect that given their expense and the fact that they'll be priority targets that the PLAN will likely use their submarines and Type 054A/B and Type 052Ds to do the heavy lifting, since a loss of a frigate or destroyer isn't as crippling and they're much faster and cheaper to build. It'll be like that image where the US navy has a handful of decades old arleigh burkes and trump battleships vs the latest batch of PLAN destroyers, laid down 2 months ago, commissioned last week, with another 4 dozen on the way.
You’re right, I dug back into it and the specific “WWII-level destroyer production” line was me mangling a few different sources that were making related but not identical claims.
What is well documented is that China’s shipbuilding capacity and tonnage output absolutely dwarf the United States today. A 2025 CSIS study cited by Navy Times found that a single Chinese shipyard produced more commercial ship tonnage in 2024 than the entire U.S. shipbuilding industry has built since World War II, which is where I likely had the WWII comparison stuck in my head. https://www.navytimes.com/global/asia-pacific/2025/03/11/chinas-shipbuilding-dominance-a-national-security-risk-for-us-report/
That same report notes that China now produces over 50% of global shipbuilding tonnage, while the U.S. accounts for roughly 0.1%.
Separately, U.S. Congressional Research Service and Navy assessments estimate that China’s overall shipbuilding capacity measured in gross tonnage is over 200 times larger than that of the United States, largely due to its integrated civilian–military shipyard system. https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/RL33153
In terms of actual naval output, a senior U.S. Indo-Pacific Command admiral has stated that China is currently producing roughly 3–4 times more naval tonnage per year than the United States, even before accounting for its massive commercial shipbuilding sector. https://www.businessinsider.com/china-outpacing-us-shipbuilding-top-indopacom-admiral-says-2025-4
So the WWII comparison was overstated, but the underlying "issue" is arguably more serious for the US. China controls roughly half of global shipbuilding capacity, much of it in dual-use yards that can be partially redirected under wartime mobilization. The United States, by contrast, represents only a fraction of a percent of global shipbuilding and lacks the industrial depth to rapidly replace naval losses in a prolonged conflict. Apologies again I will have to avoid posting so early in the morning without rechecking my sources.
Even wilder! Dang.